New Things Happening At Petrescue...

[tdierikx]

Has anyone seen the latest PetRescue fundraising effort? They've taken on some tiny kittens and are hand raising themselves...

One would think that with the number of rescues out there that PetRescue could have tapped into - with many extremely experienced foster carers to boot - why would they now be doing rescue themselves?

Conflict of interest or not? Love to hear opinions...

T.

[melzawelza]

I don't really see an issue, what sort of conflict of interest are you thinking of?

Edited March 4, 2016 by melzawelza

[*kirty*]

$1000 to raise two kittens????? Wtf?????

[Dave-o]

I think their wording is bad. It definitely doesn't cost $1000 to raise 2 kittens which could easily be re-homed in coming weeks to a family who would cover the costs of raising them. They're using it as a vehicle to raise money in general, for the organisation as a whole not just for the kittens.

[*kirty*]

That is not what they have said.

"We are hoping to raise $1000 to help cover the costs of food, vaccinations, microchips, desexing, flea and worm treatment."

[Dame Aussie]

I don't see an issue with it in general but yeah I'd question that amount!

Although it could be like Dave-o said and anything not used for the kittens is put onto another area?

Edited March 4, 2016 by Dame Aussie

[Rozzie]

That is not what they have said.

"We are hoping to raise $1000 to help cover the costs of food, vaccinations, microchips, desexing, flea and worm treatment."

And this further on in the post...

"Any extra funds raised will give PetRescue a much-needed boost to keep up with the growing demand for our vital free support services. With your extra support, we can continue helping rescue groups, shelters and pounds save the lives of thousands of homeless pets throughout Australia."<br style="color: rgb(20, 24, 35); font-family: helvetica, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18px;">

[tdierikx]

Now they are doing rescue themselves, does anyone see a blurring of the lines as to what services they are providing?

So many times we hear of people saying that they got their rescue pets from PetRescue, rather than the actual rescue they found via PetRescue... this is only going to add to the confusion of the general public...

T.

[Scottsmum]

I'll start this by saying this is my own personal take on it - no rescue experience here.

I've had many jobs over the years - two jobs recently in not for profits (within the last 6 years) and I think the biggest thing is - you need to be calculated in your fundraising strategy.

If you're fundraising for a cause with a face you often have a better chance of success. There's some research which suggests things / places / charities associated with sick kids often get better public donations than places which offer a (needed but) "boring" service.

In my own life - I suppose - this extrapolates out to my chosen animal charity being the shelter I got my most recent dog from - there's a face/place with a strong association to me & I want to channel my support to help ensure people can continue getting service from it. I also worked for a charity which assisted people living with a neurological disease. Families of, and people living with the disease were often the most driven fundraisers.

Now on the flip side, after going from working for a charity which focused on incurable neurological disease I went to a NFP organisation which focused on campaigning for a very specific environmental cause. We didn't deliver any programs other than one which earned an income and kept the rest of the organisation solvent. All operational costs were covered by large corporate sponsors, running on the 'smell of an oily rag' and this one program which was profitable.

Now you could argue the two were equally important services - they were to me. I have people in my life who live with the disease in question - I like knowing they have services and assistance in place to help them cope. But the environment is also important to me and I know knowing there is an organisation out there which is campaigning for it.

So what's my view on pet rescue raising? / fostering? kittens.

I'd hazard a guess that the people who run pet rescue do it because its a rely important cause for them - they've lost pets or been reunited with pets before and have that tie to the product they provide. So having someone show up with orphaned kittens would tug on the heart strings.

I'd say - they should be careful they promote that - they could see an influx of pets being dumped on them - but that's another issue. Had they turned them away they'd have been blasted as uncaring. As a side note - I found a kitten once after I adopted Scottie and couldnt keep it - it was hard to find a place which would take it (4 local vets said no, a cat based charity said no and I couldnt get to the shelter to drop it off and the rangers wouldt come and get it ... long story short a vet nurse took pity on me and took it in telling me she's tell her boss I dumped it on the door and to please never ask after it - I know it was cared for and adopted - I did casually ask after it one day when i went in for flea treatment).

So, nice people who run a service... they'd still need to fundraise. I think the kittens give PR the "face" they need.

Consider this - you jump on PR, find a pet you like the look of (I just did this - there's a few)

You click on the dog and it gives you the name and number or a link to the rescue group website.

I'm so focused on my finding my few family member that I don't think twice about PR, their rnning costs or the service they've just provded to me.

Yes there's a donate now button, but they don't tend to get a lot of love, I might come back after I've found my dog and donate but I'm more likely to sling those few dollars to the shelter or group I got the dog from - as a thank you for caring for my dog while s/he found their forever home.

So how doe's PR fundraise? I actually don't know their business model but I know it's not easy.

Pet rescue can't ask their contributing charities for money - well not for donations. They can charge for a service, but that charge needs to be capped and reasonable. They could sell product - but that's a horrible job to manage. Stock control and cost of keeping merch is insane and often more of a time waster than people realise.

So even if there is an income stream (fees for listing) it's likely it just generates enough to keep the platform running - with little for extra. So they find a face. They find a way for people to directly engage with them and give them some time in the spotlight. (plus they're doing good things - which make them feel good) - had they passed the kittens on to "generic moggy rescue" and highlighted the kittens plight it would have been a similar outcome but all fundraising would have been driven back to generic moggy rescue - effectively taking the chance to FR away from PR.

I don't see this as a conflict of interest - as I said - the people running PR are likely to be experienced. They'll have mates in rescue who can assist them with knowledge & supplies if needed and really cat shelters are so full that someone hand raising 2 kittens is likely to be appreciated not cause irritation.

More to the point - its really in all rescues best interests to keep something like PR running. There's over 9600 pets listed there at the moment. This listing service means I can jump on and see a huge range of dogs - not just what happens to pop up on my feacebook feed or is sitting in the shelter the day I happen to walk in. It also means that the peopel who run rescue are freed up to fun their rescues - which is a blessing if they're less tech savvy or not into social media.

So that's my take on it. Please feel free to pull my analysis apart but that's the way I see it. Sadly incurable neuro disease was much easier to fundraise for then keeping the country litter free - especially when we didn't actually get up and pick up litter ourselves. Raising kittens is more attractive than running a really well functioning online service.

I wont go into terminology and tactic - maybe they could have worded it better. They do have to be careful sayign things like "we need $1000 to raise kittens - but I wont go there - for now.

[Loving my Oldies]

An organisation that was sorely needed starts up doing the hard yards that no one else thought of let alone was prepared to do, becomes phenomenally successful ...... oh no! They must be doing something underhand and suspicious. Let’s bag them.

[*kirty*]

Please let me be clear, I am not bagging them nor do I believe they are doing anything wrong. I have no doubt that any extra funds will go where it is needed. My issue is claiming that it will cost approx $1000 to raise two kittens.

[Scottsmum]

Please let me be clear, I am not bagging them nor do I believe they are doing anything wrong. I have no doubt that any extra funds will go where it is needed. My issue is claiming that it will cost approx $1000 to raise two kittens.

Well the OP did ask if it was conflict of interest. Which I think not.

Wording could be better. In fact in normal circumstances you need to prove the money is going where you say it was - in my example above we didn't send money to research - so we cold never say "help us find a cure" the money went to assisting people living with the disease.

So they've covered their arse with " Any extra funds raised will give PetRescue a much-needed boost to keep up with the growing demand for our vital free support services." but yeh - could be better worded.

But more to the point - what is the cost? We tend to undersell things. We've spoken here before about the cost of raising puppies and how litters don't make a profit. Well, I wont pretend 2 kittens would cost 1000 - but is it possible? We assume they'll get rescue rates at a vet but I could probably count up to $400 easily in terms of flea treating, milk powder, vet visits, microchips, desex, vaccinations. Plus food and litter... Not 1000 ... but more than you might originally think.

[*kirty*]

I hand raise kittens all the time. I have three tiny babies here now. Vet work costs around $200 each, 2 tins of formula costs about $40, super premium food $50.

[mita]

An organisation that was sorely needed starts up doing the hard yards that no one else thought of let alone was prepared to do, becomes phenomenally successful ...... oh no! They must be doing something underhand and suspicious. Let’s bag them.

Inclined to agree. The $1000 dollars makes sense when the two things said are put together. First, the costs of raising/caring for those particular kittens & second, what's extra will go to the usual needs.

So it doesn't seem so much conflict of interest IMO, but rather an object lesson in what rescuing is about. Pet Rescue is modelling what they promote.

BTW thank heavens for the good thinking & hard work that went into setting up PR.

[Scottsmum]

I hand raise kittens all the time. I have three tiny babies here now. Vet work costs around $200 each, 2 tins of formula costs about $40, super premium food $50.

Ok - so 500 ish- yes 1000 well over but meh. I personally don't see the problem with what they're doing

[Sheridan]

Maybe everyone they contacted in their local area is full as rescues often are.

[Dame Aussie]

Now they are doing rescue themselves, does anyone see a blurring of the lines as to what services they are providing?

So many times we hear of people saying that they got their rescue pets from PetRescue, rather than the actual rescue they found via PetRescue... this is only going to add to the confusion of the general public...

T.

Does it matter? In my mind as long as animals are getting rehomed it doesn't matter which group is doing it.

[Dame Aussie]

Based on the last clinic I worked with, if a member of the public got vet work for a kitten they'd be looking at (all approx) $60 for a vaccination, $40 for a chip, $1-200 for desexing, $20 for flea/worm treatment per month plus food, times that by 2 and you've got from $6-700 so it's not that ridiculous.

[_PL_]

Now they are doing rescue themselves, does anyone see a blurring of the lines as to what services they are providing?

So many times we hear of people saying that they got their rescue pets from PetRescue, rather than the actual rescue they found via PetRescue... this is only going to add to the confusion of the general public...

T.

Does it matter? In my mind as long as animals are getting rehomed it doesn't matter which group is doing it.

Point is, they do get a lot of donations and money from advertising and sponsors and partners. Enough for paid staff, an office and all the things most of their 'clients' would love to have. And plenty to cover a neonate litter. Asking for $1000 means they will get much more than that and they have never operated as a rescue group; technically it's a bunch of office people raising a litter who would normally pay out of their own pocket. It'll probably go back into running the charity but the thing is; are they muscling in on a finite donation resource when private cat & kitten rescue is a quick way to send you broke?

Previously I've had my whinge about the PR Donation button right next to the profiles of our dogs but the argument is still that the money goes back to running the show and we're silly to complain. Maybe so. But it still irks me. So does this kitten thing, for much the same reason.

BTW it does go back in so I'm not insinuating otherwise.

[westiemum]

I thought it was three kittens? Tiny, Teeny and Teensy Weensey? Raising from a week old? Desexing and vacs for all three could easily cost $700? So I wouldn't have thought $1000 is unreasonable? A bit over $300 of expenses per kitten?

And given that their advertisers and sponsors are not signed up for directly supporting the rehabbing and re-homing of rescue kittens I actually think it's pretty honourable to fund raise transparently for something they don't usually do? The only problem I see is if they use money for this that wasn't originally raised/obtained and ear-marked for this purpose. So overall I don't see a problem.