Animal rescue groups – celebrating good work

Thanks for reading and commenting! Hope to hear from you again! :)

I do believe I may have found a new place to hang out. Good for you telling it like it is. Not something that is easy, that's for sure.

This is my first visit to your blog and this second post I have read. I like your style. Keep it up! You're not alone ; )

Thanks, Marcia! One of my pets is from a shelter. I adopted the other two through individuals who were trying to find them homes. I would definitely obtain a dog through a breeder or rescue organization if it were the right pet for me. I don't think it matters where they come from.

Lindsay....I love your helpful and thoughtful blog. You seem to be an "every" owner, just like the rest of us "every" owners. I think for the most part, owners try to do the best they can and know how to do. I have 4 dogs, 3 from the same breeder, and 1 rescue. They are all the same breed and all are loved and treated the same. Luckily I have many friends that have rescued and bought dogs, all in the same household, so don't run into too many that think I'm a horrible person for buying a dog.

For a blog titled 'animal rescue groups - celebrating good work' this seems to be mainly about you and mainly negative.

You, too, are apparently close-minded about how a dog should be obtained. Many of your recent posts have been dedicated to criticizing rescue groups for the way that they screen applicants, since it is not the way that you believe it should be done.

'Rescuing is a lot like religion and politics and media – a few people telling everyone else what to do.' I recognize that this blog is your opinion, but after reading your many posts about loosening up adoption requirements, it sure feels like you are telling rescues what to do.

I asked on Facebook when you were going to start your own rescue so that you could go ahead and give a dog to anyone, but I got no response. Starting and running a rescue is an awful lot of work, and the rescue takes on the responsibility for that dog's life, so although I don't agree with every rescue's policies, I won't criticize them - they are doing the work, they need to do what they feel is best for the dog. If I don't like it, I am certainly free to start my own rescue and do it the way I want - as you are as well.

Many people that foster and volunteer for rescues only do so because they are comfortable with the policies of the rescue. If a rescue makes the decision to loosen their policies by doing away with home visits and perhaps reference checks, you can bet they will lose volunteers and most certainly foster homes. As you know, it is difficult to give up a foster dog, and if foster homes don't feel comfortable that some effort has been made to ensure the adopter is a responsible pet owner, they will no longer foster. Maybe waiving these requirements would mean dogs could be adopted out faster, but where are the dogs going to live while they wait if there are no fosters? Although some dogs will move in and out at a faster pace, there are lots of dogs that are not going to get adopted quickly no matter what the process is. Rescues need fosters to take these dogs as well as the dogs that move in and out faster. I believe that changing the policies of foster based rescues would result in a decrease in the number of dogs that could be accepted (because of lack of fosters) and adopted out. I personally fostered for a group that did minimal screening on adopters, and after giving one foster dog up to someone I felt like I knew nothing about, I quit. I know several other fosters that have done the same.

You know, of course, that although I am not the 'high horse woman,' I AM a part of that rescue group in Fargo. Although you have readers from all over the place, since you are based in Fargo, I suspect that your largest group of readers are from the Fargo area. You mention our rescue often, for both good and bad reasons. You take screen shots of our Facebook page and both commend and criticize it. You talk about our dogs on a pretty regular basis. I disagree when you say that your readers don't know where you volunteer, give them some credit for picking up on that. So when you write about dog rescues and policies, as a reader from Fargo or somewhere I else, I would probably make the assumption that you are discussing your experience with the rescue that you volunteer for - and that the policies you discuss are their policies. I personally find it difficult not to scream, 'That's not us!' every time you write so negatively about some policies or something you dislike in rescue because I don't want people to make that assumption. You're right, most people from around the world don't care about this tiny rescue in this tiny town - but I do! And so do the other volunteers, because we do a lot of work for the rescue. I don't want even one reader to believe things about us that aren't true because of your blog.

Many, many of your blog topics are based on your experiences with our rescue - taking a dog to training class, fostering a timid dog, fostering an older dog, etc... I have wondered in the past if you volunteer just to have something to write about, and if that's the case, that's your decision. I appreciate volunteering regardless of the motivation behind it.

What I can not appreciate is you telling people it's ok to just go ahead and lie on their adoption applications. You may not agree with rescues' policies, but I certainly think you should respect the decision of the rescues. You can continue to blog about how rescues need to change, maybe your readers will continue to find it interesting after the 30th post addressing the same topic, I don't know. It's your right to blog about whatever you want, obviously, including lying on an adoption application. However, I hope that you didn't expect that there would be no negativity coming at you for that.