Pets.ca - Pet forum for dogs cats and humans 

-->

Rent-A-Pet ?

wolfcat
July 30th, 2008, 04:23 PM
I saw this listing on craigslist today:
>For those who have had to give up pets due to life changes, would it have helped to have been able to rent a similar pet first? On the radio this morning there is a company in the states called FlexPets that rents pets to people by the hour, day etc.
Do you think that if you had rented first it would have prevented you from buying a pet?

According to the company, Pet renters are screened and home interviewed. The pets are well looked after by the company owner when not being rented and there are limits of 5 regular renters per pet.

I’m just looking for viewpoints on whether this idea could help reduce homeless pets, I’m not opening a business. <

Anyone heard of this happening elsewhere?

Is it a good thing:thumbs up or a bad thing:cry: ?

Wonder if it really would help pet adoptions, or might be a source of donations for pet rescues/humanes - rent-to-own ?

kigndano
July 30th, 2008, 04:27 PM
i think the dogs would have an awful time adjusting to hourly owners.

maybe service dogs could be used, but then you arent really renting a pet of the same kind.



im not a fan of the idea.:yuck:

erykah1310
July 30th, 2008, 04:42 PM
I see that as being a problem, think about it... how does the pet have any structure to its life? Feeding times/amounts, walk lengths, there would be no routine for them what so ever, I see this making for some very frustrated pets.
Bad idea:cry: IMHO

wolfcat
July 30th, 2008, 08:27 PM
Someone else posted this reply:
While it may be beneficial to prospective owners to try out a pet before obtaining one, can you imagine the trauma and stress to the animal??? It would be in a different home every week or month. Animals bond to their owners and families and I do not think going for try-outs at different people's homes would make a well-adjusted. loving, loyal, happy pet.

I also think that responsible pet owners take the time to think out the responsibilities and commitment required when you get a pet. You know that it needs you and depends on you for its quality of life.

Many animals that end up here or at shelters are from people that got a pet on impulse cause it was soooo cute and didn't think of the responsibilities so I don't think it would be necessary to rent out a pet to persons that actually stop and think what is entailed, and the impulse buyers would not rent one out either cause than they would fall into the category of someone that thinks first.

Okay...am I making sense??? LOL. My opinion only.......:shrug:

allymack
July 30th, 2008, 09:35 PM
i personally think that is a horrible thing to do to a pet. I mean if you really want to know what it will take to look after a dog, talk to a friend who has one and see if you can babysit it for a day or two ( but i mean really babysit it, walk it, feed it, bath [thrown in , because it does have to be done] training time set aside[if chosen], grooming time, having it sleep at your house, playing with it, taking it out for regular pee breaks, picking up poop after it) i mean alot of time and energy goes in to a dog so you need to know what oyu getting in to and renting a dog out like that is not the way to go about it. That dog will be a wreck after only a year or two, IMO. it wont be stable or happy at all..

wolfcat
July 31st, 2008, 11:35 PM
Yeah I'm not sure it's good for animals too.

Although.... In Toronto as part of therapy for depressed patients and seniors, some people take a calm, laid back cat for them to interact with - as part of therapy. :goodvibes: Cat does go home to one owner though.

Still interested if anyone else can see a mutual benefit to potential owners, rescues to raise funds and of course - the animals themselves.

Maybe kittens could be socialized faster with many people? hmmmm

:shrug:

kigndano
August 1st, 2008, 06:28 AM
not sure about cats.

deinitely not beneficial in any way to a dog.:sorry:

Chris21711
August 1st, 2008, 08:18 AM
I have heard about this. It is truly unbelievable what humans will stoop to to make a buck :loser:

ancientgirl
August 1st, 2008, 08:27 AM
Yeah I'm not sure it's good for animals too.

Although.... In Toronto as part of therapy for depressed patients and seniors, some people take a calm, laid back cat for them to interact with - as part of therapy. :goodvibes: Cat does go home to one owner though.

Still interested if anyone else can see a mutual benefit to potential owners, rescues to raise funds and of course - the animals themselves.

Maybe kittens could be socialized faster with many people? hmmmm

:shrug:

I think it's a terrible idea, for the reasons others have stated. Also, yes I think therapy pets are different. Those pets are usually owned by someone and so they have their owner and that structure already in their life. And the owner goes with them to the therapy's. I was thinking of doing that with one of my cats, and the woman I talked to from the program told me people never leave their pets when they go to visits.

They wouldn't do that with a child, but since some people don't think animals have feelings or grow attachments they see it as okay.

I can't like it.

sugarcatmom
August 1st, 2008, 10:33 AM
Looks like the city of Boston doesn't like the idea either. They just recently voted to ban Flexpetz and any other pet rental company from setting up shop:
http://www.animallawcoalition.com/companion-animal-breeding/article/500

Soter
August 1st, 2008, 10:41 AM
i'm not a great fan of the idea. i think it would be horrible for any animal, but especially dogs. it might even be traumatic for some, cos' in a dogs eyes, wherever they are they believe they are in a pack enviroment, so imagine being moved from one pack to another, just as you are beginning to settle down!!!

soter:pawprint:
near to being a puppy owner

ancientgirl
August 1st, 2008, 11:00 AM
7. Renting encourages "disposable pet syndrome"-thinking of all pets as "things" we enjoy till they're no longer cute or convenient, then return.

8. Pet rentals and dog fighting are on the same continuum: They trade on desensitization of humans, commoditization of animals. One business conditions us to tolerate the other.

I think those last two points hit the nail on the head why this is such a bad idea.

BenMax
August 1st, 2008, 12:02 PM
All very good points and I as well am not a huge fan. Again it is insinuating that animals are 'objects' once again which defeats the purpose of what everyone is fighting for in regards to the law.

But if they were to take animals from shelters that were destined for euthansia due to over-crowding...then I would seriously have to think about this alternative.

Personally, I feel that all potential families that are not 'sure' should consult with rescues or shelters to foster first for a period of two weeks. This foster could be considered "foster with intent to adopt". This should absolutely define for the potential families of what it takes to be a forever loving family. I guess this is another topic all together.

Again the idea does not really take into consideration of the imbalance, stress and the potential behavioural problems it may cause these animals.

Just my opinion.

Dingo
August 1st, 2008, 01:38 PM
People who want some "dog time" can get it for free by walking dogs for the SPCA or other shelters. I can't see why anyone would pay to "rent" a dog.

On the other hand, if the idea was to give people the opportunity to "try out" an animal for a short period with the intent to permanently adopt it (sort of like a dating service, perhaps), then I could see how it might be useful as a different model for a rescue/shelter.

On the whole, though, I can't see it really benefitting the animals or being a viable business model either.

SolaMio
August 1st, 2008, 01:58 PM
People who want some "dog time" can get it for free by walking dogs for the SPCA or other shelters. I can't see why anyone would pay to "rent" a dog.

On the other hand, if the idea was to give people the opportunity to "try out" an animal for a short period with the intent to permanently adopt it (sort of like a dating service, perhaps), then I could see how it might be useful as a different model for a rescue/shelter.

On the whole, though, I can't see it really benefitting the animals or being a viable business model either.

You're right- so many shelter animals would appreciate some companionship, exercise, and maybe a shot at a good home... I think some shelters do offer a trial period with the animal.

kathryn
August 1st, 2008, 03:21 PM
My shelter allows dogs to go for 'sleep overs' to make sure they fit in with the family first, no obligation. That's perfectly appropriate to get the dog out of the shelter every once in a while to try to find a new family.

Dogs and cats aren't furniture.. they shouldn't be tossed around and returned and re-rented. I think it would be way more harmful for a cat though. Cat's HATE going to new places and like to settle down at one house. Dogs are a bit easier to deal with, but it still not appropriate for them.

As said, if you want to spend some time with cats or dogs, do a shelter a favor and go to a shelter and hang out there.