Adoption fee "too expensive"

[RuralPug]

How do other rescuers cope with comments about dogs up for adoption being too  pricey?

It has always been my habit to respond to such comments with an offer of a special deal - instead of an adoption fee, they can reimburse all the vet fees paid in respect of that dog! (99% of the time, those fees will always exceed my standard adoption fee of $350 for a fully vet worked small or medium dog). That usually shuts them up. 

I guess this is just a rant after I had to resort to my usual comment after a "shame she is so pricey" remark on a FB ad this morning. 

And while I am whinging, am I too strict for insisting on meeting the other dog(s) in a prospective adoptive household? 
I insist on a meet and greet on neutral ground that includes the other dog because if the foster and the other dog take an instant dislike to each other (which can happen) it is just hell for everyone and a waste of a trial period. But apparently I am being 'too difficult'. Sigh.

[persephone]

You are being responsible ..and operating from a very careful/caring perspective  

[_PL_]

There's nothing much you can say to hagglers. On the flip side I've had people spend more in travel (after a yard check etc) than on the dog so it all evens out. I like your response though. $350 is a bargain compared to vetwork.

Most just can't afford to take the hit if you're running a small group without the benefit of a high rate of donations.

We've also got other dogs being vetworked who will never be rehomed (the Forever Care dogs).

 

And no, not too strict. The dog is yours and if you were rehoming one of your own that wasn't a foster you would still do the same. I think people forget that the dogs live in our homes and become one of the family so sending them off to take a chance on being the right fit is just risky in my opinion. Others will disagree but such is rescue. 

 

People thank us in the end for taking care so again, it more than makes up for the very few complainers.  

 

 

 

Edited April 4, 2018 by Powerlegs

[Boronia]

If the dog suits and the new owner's love it they will pay the cost

It is not bargain bazaar, a garage sale or a 'make an offer' or 'how much for cash' or scumtree

It is dog rescue and the price reflects the effort/vet fees put in (well it never covers it all)

Just because THEY don't want to pay the price is not a valid reason.

The 'what is your best' price gambit can be countered with a price higher than your asking price (this usually shuts them up)

Tyre Kickers' not welcome

End of story

 

[W T]

1 hour ago, Boronia said:

If the dog suits and the new owner's love it they will pay the cost

is this also valid if this dog was surrendered by a BYB who couldn't sell it because people interested in buying it have been shot down in flames for attempting to buy from an unethical breeder? if the answer is NO: that means every surrendered dog with a BYB history has to be euthanized? if the answer is YES: why get people shot down in flames if they don't stick to the detour of surrendering and adoption?

[_PL_]

That's from another thread on a completely different topic. 

 

I can't answer your question anyway because if someone wants a dog from a BYB there isn't much rescue can do except advocate for desexing. 

[Boronia]

1 hour ago, W T said:

is this also valid if this dog was surrendered by a BYB who couldn't sell it because people interested in buying it have been shot down in flames for attempting to buy from an unethical breeder? if the answer is NO: that means every surrendered dog with a BYB history has to be euthanized? if the answer is YES: why get people shot down in flames if they don't stick to the detour of surrendering and adoption?

That is a silly statement WT, this has nothing to do with any back yard breeder, Rural Pug is just talking about rescue so by extrapolating RP's statement to a dog being euthanased when surrendered from a BYB is stretching it.

[W T]

16 minutes ago, Boronia said:

That is a silly statement WT, this has nothing to do with any back yard breeder, Rural Pug is just talking about rescue so by extrapolating RP's statement to a dog being euthanased when surrendered from a BYB is stretching it.

silly? - maybe an inconvenient question. If rescues don't differentiate between dogs from "BYB" and "non-BYB", thus providing an convenient outlet / surrendering option for BYB: don't they support the system too like anyone who buys directly from a BYB?

 

Eta: or, in other words: what differences are there re someone having to pay an "adoption fee" compared to buying the dog - for perhaps less money - from a BYB? yes, the BYB will get the money, but on the other side there is also no work for the rescue involved. For the dog it might be better to find a new owner without much detours. And as long as BYB can conveniently get rid of unsellable stock by just surrendering the dog nothing will change anyway. 

Edited April 5, 2018 by W T

[Boronia]

As I said... this has nothing to do with any back yard breeder

[_PL_]

Sigh. Yes, not the topic at all. Start a new thread if you want to debate where rescue gets their dogs from. 

[W T]

this is a pure breed forum?

 

now, pure breed is for many dog owners linked somehow to quality. And the term quality is often used by breeders to justify the price for the dog, and I guess there is nothing wrong with it.

 

However, if I see the quality of some dogs (age, blind, deaf, on medications etc.) advertised for adoption, IMO it is understandable that people interested in these kind of dogs might think that the adoption fee asked for is too high.

[Two Best Dogs!]

I think people making comments like that are basically saying they don’t think the dog is “worth” that much. 

 

Personally I think getting a health checked desexed fed assessed dog for that price is a bargain!!! Thank you!!!

[Guest crazydoglady99]

It's interesting isn't it RP, it's often the same people that buy a puppy on facebook for a couple of hundred dollars.. with no vetwork..

 

While I don't understand people's logic, I think it stands as a good filter, to save you wasting unnecessary time on tyre kickers.

[Panto]

WT it sounds like you have a bone to pick with rescue or a rescue organisation (and I am not refuting that is not possible or even probable), but it seems at odds with this topic. 

 

Rescues are so diverse, you cannot paint them all with the same  brush.

 

For an ethical rescue, if it is the case that no money (vet treatment etc) had been spent on that particular dog (which is the exception rather than the norm), as a consumer I would happily pay it knowing that those funds go to help the next dog who is not so fortunate to have not needed treatment, or even consider backfilling the onerous costs rescues take on and don't have replenished. They're doing the work many of us don't have the money or heart or will to continue with and I'm grateful that they're there. 

 

 

[_PL_]

26 minutes ago, W T said:

this is a pure breed forum?

This is the rescue section of the forum for all breeds. Again, if you want to debate the ethics of rescuing this isn't the thread, you're taking it off topic. 

 

The vetwork, care, lifetime backup etc we put in on ALL dogs either from the pound or surrendered more than makes up for a relatively small adoption fee. 

[juice]

$350 is nothing , however lately I have seen pups from $600 upwards on PR. I think that’s pushing it for a xbred. 

I always did home checks , no way would I let a dog go without checking any other dogs in the household.

 

[W T]

1 hour ago, Thistle the dog said:

I think people making comments like that are basically saying they don’t think the dog is “worth” that much. 

 

Personally I think getting a health checked desexed fed assessed dog for that price is a bargain!!! Thank you!!!

you are assuming - and believe it or not, paying $ 350 or more for a health?-checked 9 year old blind and deaf dog, that is also on drugs, isn't a bargain for everyone.

[_PL_]

5 minutes ago, W T said:

you are assuming - and believe it or not, paying $ 350 or more for a health?-checked 9 year old blind and deaf dog, that is also on drugs, isn't a bargain for everyone.

Then you don't have to adopt that dog. 

[W T]

35 minutes ago, Powerlegs said:

Then you don't have to adopt that dog. 

Thank you - I wasn't so sure about this.

 

People forget that most mortals and organisations - and I guess rescues too - have to work on a budget. Now as a rescue you can spend a lot of the available budget on a 9 year old sick dog, or you get him euthanized and spend the money saved on vet bills etc. on 10 other dogs that are in a better shape and have a better outlook.

 

This thread wouldn't have been opened if there wouldn't be some pressure from outside on rescues re this adoption fee, and I believe this pressure would be less if the quality of the dogs in question would justify the price. However, if people - count me in - get the feeling that a lot of money is spent on dogs that might be better euthanized (dare that I say this) those people will be likely less supportive. The odd saying "you get what you pay for" definitely doesn't match the pricing policy of some rescues.

[_PL_]

Oh that old chestnut. 

I make no absolutely apologies for rescuing old dogs, nor spending the money on them. 

Nor do I apologise for our adoption policies or adoption fees.

If you don't like it, open your own doors to anything or anyone homeless and see if you can look them in the eye and say they aren't worth it.