Okay, so I'm not sure if this is the place to post this, but none of the subtopics in the Rescue forum seemed quite right for this thread...
My boyfriend and I have been looking for a friend for our Pug, Milo, for a little while. We're no longer actively
looking, but I am keeping an eye out for dogs that could be the right fit.
Here is my dilemma: I have never been the go-to-a-breeder type, and I haven't supported purchasing from a pet store since my mom got me a ferret from PJ's when I was 7 years old (yes, I know how irresponsible that was on all accounts - but I treated her well). But
I am beginning to become increasingly frustrated by the rescue community.
I've always been all about rescue. I had wanted a dog since I could remember, and never entertained the idea of going anywhere other than a shelter (I have NO clue where I learned that). But now that I spend more time educating myself about it, I'm hearing all sorts of terrible things about illegitimate rescues, organizations knowingly adopting out puppies with parvo that had never seen a vet, etc. I don't know if I can (or should) name names on this board, but I will choose not to until someone tells me otherwise.
We applied for two dogs a few weeks ago. One rescue got back to us via e-mail and said our application "looks great!" and that they would seriously consider us even though they had a few other applications for the same dog. I have since found out that the dog was updated and not one of our references was ever called. I'm not saying this rescue did anything wrong, but needless to say I was disappointed that being "seriously considered" didn't mean having our references checked. Is this common practice for rescues? (Please don't misunderstand me - I am very happy this dog found a home, I'm just wondering if they would check references for all applicants or just the one they thought was best).
The second rescue raised red flags for me. They got back to my boyfriend for a telephone interview. This dog was much younger than the first (8 months) and had been in rescue for 2 months (since the age of 6 months). Her description read that she was not housebroken but was "coming along well" or something to that effect. But the foster mom who spoke with my boyfriend told him that the dog was not at all housebroken because she didn't "have time to work with her" and that because she was "paper trained" she would pee on "any mat she sees". Yes, I was prepared to work on housebreaking. But what kind of rescue has fosters who take in puppies and then don't have time to work with them over 2 months?
Am I being too suspicious, or does this seem wrong to anyone else?
So my question has two parts. Please, can anyone renew my faith in the rescue system? I will never buy from a pet store but I am starting to consider breeders and that scares me - a lot - because it isn't something I ever thought I would do. And no, my opinion isn't being changed by these two small experiences...refer to my next question below!
Secondly, does anyone know of a good, reputable rescue - especially ones you have dealt with and volunteered for/adopted from personally? I am becoming wary based on some recent horror stories, and can't even take the THS seriously after some reports I've read.
Sorry for the ludicrously long post. I'm new here, but I'm notorious elsewhere for my lengthy posts and verbal diarrhea
Hopefully either I'll get better or you'll all learn to put up with it, HAHA