# An Idle Thought



## Calistar

As we sit awaiting January 11 when we bring home our new golden puppy Gumbeaux, we have reflected on the entire rescue process. Where we live there is a rescue organization to which we applied. We had our home visit and were approved and time went by and nothing . We contacted other rescue organizations In Southern California, Dallas, Houston, and Atlanta to name a few. Every time we were rejected because we lived too far away for them to do a home inspection. We would try to explain our local rescue group had approved us but simply had no dogs. Every time we would hear that they don't trust the inspection of other groups. The national golden retriever club would do well to get the rescue groups to work more closely together on issues like this. The individual arrogance of these clubs with respect to home visits does nothing but hurt the goldens looking for their forever home.

Because of our experience, we decided to buy a puppy rather than wait for an indeterminate time for a rescue golden. I would suspect others have done likewise. While i would not want to demean the hardworking people at the golden rescue organizations, they just need to stop and exhibit a little common sense.


----------



## nolefan

I'm sorry for your frustration. It does seem a shame that they haven't found a way to deal with this issue given how the internet has brought us all closer together in so many other ways. 

wishing you the best as you count down the days to bring home your new puppy.....


----------



## Elisabeth Kazup

I've noticed the same sort of attitude in Michigan, pretty sanctimonious. I understand the reasons, but it's over the top so they just end up keeping the dogs. There's no way we would ever be approved for one of their dogs. I would love to rescue a senior or two in the future, but I don't hold out much hope for that.


----------



## SheetsSM

I'm sorry for your experience. When I was stationed in OK, I volunteered with the golden rescue there, we had a plethora of goldens and were dependent on our networkIng with GR rescues in other states, I actually had another breed rescue help me out with a home visit for a family in TX where the other TX GR rescues didn't cover. We try our best, but at the end of the day, we're doing the best we can with the goldens' welfare as the priority. There is nothings worse than to get reports that a dog you adopted out is far removed from the rescue and living in less than stellar conditions and not being able to do anything about it


----------



## Calistar

Another issue that we had was that our local rescue group absolutely had a fit when we initially said we used kennels for sleeping our dogs or when we leave for an extended period. We had actually agreed to second guess what had been a long held belief in handling dogs that had always worked successfully for us and most people we knew in order to get approved. When we grew tired of waiting and started contacting breeders, they were almost unanimous on the idea of having dogs sleep in crates. It made me think that possibly the rescue people are not as knowledgeable as we would have hoped they would be.


----------



## goldensrbest

Yes, i agree with you, adopting from a rescue,is just so hard to do.


----------



## Dallas Gold

I had a very reputable breeder tell me once that it was much harder to adopt from Golden Retriever rescues than reputable breeders! I don't know if that's true or not, but found that comment very interesting. 

I used to volunteer for one of the local golden rescues here. At one point (late 2005, early 2006) they were talking with a Colorado Golden rescue about transferring dogs there in hopes of a better chance of adoption, but unfortunately the Colorado group (don't remember which one) did not want Goldens with medical issues like Heartworms. Heartworm disease is a major issue down here with a good number of shelter dogs testing positive for it if they were strays or outside dogs. It was just too much to accomplish at the time, especially since both groups were run by volunteers with no paid professional help or administration. I know of a couple of transfers of senior Goldens to somewhere on the West Coast, but it's a complicated matter (sharing of intake expenses and medical exams/treatments/procedures) and is harder to do than you would imagine if you've never been involved in rescue. Since they are non-profit groups with tax exempt status everything has to be documented and approached with that in mind as well. 

There are groups, with more professional/paid administrators running the rescues, that have established transports, but they usually work with area shelters and it usually involves volunteer pilots doing the transports with donated private planes. There is a group on Spokane that is associated with some of the local municipal shelters here in doing these types of transports--usually mixes.

I'm sorry you weren't able to rescue when you wanted to do so, but it really is a good thing your local group didn't have a lot of dogs needing homes.


----------



## Dallas Gold

Calistar said:


> Another issue that we had was that our local rescue group absolutely had a fit when we initially said we used kennels for sleeping our dogs or when we leave for an extended period. We had actually agreed to second guess what had been a long held belief in handling dogs that had always worked successfully for us and most people we knew in order to get approved. When we grew tired of waiting and started contacting breeders, they were almost unanimous on the idea of having dogs sleep in crates. It made me think that possibly the rescue people are not as knowledgeable as we would have hoped they would be.


Rescue groups have legal title to the dogs before adoption and can establish whatever rules they want to screen potential adopters. They have financial and legal responsibility for them. Most want to make sure dogs aren't kenneled or sheltered outside, Golden rescues especially. If this is your arrangement you will probably do better going through a breeder. 

At rescue adoption meet and greets I've heard people complaining about the spaying/neutering policy (all done before adoptions)...spay/neuter is one of the underlying pre-requisites of most rescues and they aren't going to waive that one!


----------



## Deber

I am with you on Rescue Groups too. We wanted 2 rescues, but we were denied because of our age. Really frustrating and hurtful. No visits, no consideration of our experience, just we were on the borderline of their age limit. So we have 2 pups! Really feel that each family should be evaluated on its own merits. So many dogs need homes, yet the door was slammed in our face when we wanted one.


----------



## Dallas Gold

Deber said:


> I am with you on Rescue Groups too. We wanted 2 rescues, but we were denied because of our age. Really frustrating and hurtful. No visits, no consideration of our experience, just we were on the borderline of their age limit. So we have 2 pups! Really feel that each family should be evaluated on its own merits. So many dogs need homes, yet the door was slammed in our face when we wanted one.



Was this a golden rescue group? Wow... What is their age cut off? I hope they realize that empty nesters can have disposable income to donate to rescues in appreciation for their affection for their new family members. :doh:

Sheesh... that is ridiculous! I know of one guy in his 80s that adopted a puppy from a local Golden rescue a few years ago.


----------



## Charliethree

Sorry things did not work through the rescues near you. But don't paint them all with the same brush. Their policies are often developed from experience, we used to adopt out puppies with a spay/neuter contract, puppies had to be altered at 6 months - the few that simply did not do it, 'forgot' etc. caused them to change the policy. Not to say these dogs weren't in good homes, but it is a vital part of the contract. We had one adopter not alter when they were supposed to the dog ended up getting pregnant and was also very sick (got infection after the birthing) - the rescue removed the dog and puppies from the home. More homeless dogs to rehome.
My rescue, Charlie, was originally adopted from a rescue in the states, the people that adopted him, couldn't 'deal' with the fact that he wouldn't stay in the yard when he was home alone, and he was repeatedly picked up by animal services. They ditched him at a kill shelter, where he almost didn't make it out, hours away from death, because of his 'issues'. Was the rescue he was adopted from contacted by the shelter or the adopter ,and would/could they have been able to do anything to save his life if they had? Don't know. The point is - the further away an animal gets from your 'reach' as a rescue - the more difficult it is to help or know what is going on with the dog and the less likely the adopter is going to return the dog to the rescue if they cannot keep it for what ever reasonl
I would expect human nature being what it is, that there are some rescues being to 'high handed' in dealings with their dogs, but - the bottom line is they have to have policies to minimize the risk of the dog ending up in need of rescue again. But I can't agree with age restrictions, or the age of family members being an issue.


----------



## mylissyk

Calistar said:


> Another issue that we had was that our local rescue group absolutely had a fit when we initially said we used kennels for sleeping our dogs or when we leave for an extended period. We had actually agreed to second guess what had been a long held belief in handling dogs that had always worked successfully for us and most people we knew in order to get approved. When we grew tired of waiting and started contacting breeders, they were almost unanimous on the idea of having dogs sleep in crates. It made me think that possibly the rescue people are not as knowledgeable as we would have hoped they would be.


I wonder if they misunderstood the term "kennel" to mean outside kennel runs, and didn't realize you meant indoor crates. 

I wish people would stop bashing rescues when they don't get what they want. Do you realize they are all volunteer run by people who have full time jobs, full time families, donating their time and energy to help dogs out of bad situations into better homes? Long distance adoptions are logistically difficult, besides having to locate someone they trust, but probably have never met or had contact with, to do a home visit in an area a long distance away, there is also the problem of transporting the dog that far, and getting it back if it doesn't work.

I'm sorry you didn't find a dog to adopt in your area, that's actually a good thing because it means in your area there are fewer Goldens that NEED to be rescued. But there is no fault in the rescues having policies requiring home visits, and having a manageable area to work in for adoptions.

I just wish people that are disappointed would stop and consider if getting irritated with a rescue group is really the right reaction, when all they are doing is working for the best interests of the dogs they are helping.


----------



## Debles

mylissyk said:


> I wonder if they misunderstood the term "kennel" to mean outside kennel runs, and didn't realize you meant crates.
> 
> I wish people would stop bashing rescues when they don't get what they want. Do you realize they are all volunteer run by people who have full time jobs, full time families, donating their time and energy to help dogs out of bad situations into better homes? Long distance adoptions are logistically difficult, besides having to locate someone they trust, but probably have never met or had contact with, to do a home visit in an area a long distance away, there is also the problem of transporting the dog that far.
> 
> I'm sorry you didn't find a dog to adopt in our area, that's actually a good thing because it means in your area there are fewer Goldens that NEED to be rescued. But there is no fault in the rescues having policies requiring home visits, and having a manageable area to work in for adoptions.
> 
> 
> I just wish people that are disappointed would stop and consider if getting irritated with a rescue group is really the right reaction, when all they are doing is working for the best interests of the dogs they are helping.



I totally agree with you Melissa!!! I am active in GRRIN here in Nebraska. We have relaxed our rules to allow qualified people to have seniors without a fence. But we will not relax our rules in a situation that risks the dog. We allow families with children to have dogs as long as we can assure that the golden will be a valued family member.

We use crates to housebreak and make our rescues feel safe. The rescue must have misunderstood "kennel" as outside kennels which we would never OK. many of these dogs have spent their entire lives in an outside kennel.

We also work closely with other rescues, especially in Colorado.


We rescue many goldens every year and the number increases yearly.Our number one priority is the dogs.


----------



## LifeOfRiley

I'm sorry you've had such a bad experience with the rescue groups. I agree with you - a little common sense would go a long way.

We had thought about maybe adopting another Golden at some point, but were so put off by the policies of our local rescue and the way they do things, we've since ruled it out completely.

I work from home, so he/she wouldn't be left home alone all day. We have the financial means to give them the best of everything. We're active people who like to get outside and we're experienced enough (and willing) to deal with any behavior issues that might pop up. But we'd be turned down flat because we don't have a fenced yard.
This is a rescue that always has at least a dozen Goldens and is always looking for donations, yet they consistently turn away potential adopters. 

That's bad enough. But what really blew my mind was seeing two of their adopted dogs at PetSmart a couple months ago. They were having a fundraising event and there was an older couple there with two dogs that they had adopted from this rescue. These dogs absolutely STUNK. I'm not exaggerating when I say that I've NEVER been around dogs who smelled so bad. These poor dogs hadn't seen a brush (let alone a bath) in God knows how long, but apparently that's acceptable. It's really sad.


----------



## Debles

Deni, that is horrible. I can say that our rescue would definitely say something if one of our dogs showed up like that!!!


----------



## mylissyk

Penny's Mom said:


> I've noticed the same sort of attitude in Michigan, pretty sanctimonious. I understand the reasons, but it's over the top so they just end up keeping the dogs. There's no way we would ever be approved for one of their dogs. I would love to rescue a senior or two in the future, but I don't hold out much hope for that.


Maybe try volunteering for the rescue and find out from the inside what is going on. If it's really "sanctimonious" you might be able to change it.


----------



## mylissyk

Deber said:


> I am with you on Rescue Groups too. We wanted 2 rescues, but we were denied because of our age. Really frustrating and hurtful. No visits, no consideration of our experience, just we were on the borderline of their age limit. So we have 2 pups! Really feel that each family should be evaluated on its own merits. So many dogs need homes, yet the door was slammed in our face when we wanted one.


I agree with you on this one, age should not be a deciding factor for adopting to someone. We adopt to older couples all the time, the dogs usually end up with better time and attention that young families busy with children. We do try to make sure the dogs energy level is manageable for whatever age the adopters are, an able bodied, active, fit 75 yr old person may be able to handle a young dog, but another 75 yr old person who has mobility issues or is not as active we try to match with a dog that is the right energy, activity level for them too.


----------



## LifeOfRiley

Debles said:


> Deni, that is horrible. I can say that our rescue would definitely say something if one of our dogs showed up like that!!!


It was heartbreaking to see these dogs in such bad shape.
They were both looking at us, wagging their tails, so we had to stop and say hi to them. And the worst part was, once this couple started talking to us, we realized that we'd seen the woman a couple years ago at another event at PetSmart. (I recognized her thick German accent.) So they've obviously been active with this rescue for quite some time. You'd think those in charge would know that their dogs aren't properly cared for.


----------



## MarieP

I think this discussion is very interesting. I understand that the rescues are focused on the well being of the dogs. However, when this focus goes too far, it actually denies these dogs the possibility of getting great homes. And that keeps the rescues from being able to rescue more dogs because they do not have enough foster homes. Then these rejected people go and buy puppies. And maybe they get puppies from great, reputable breeders, and that's great. But maybe they get a pup from a no-so great breeder. Then we are just perpetuating the problem. 

I know that I would never qualify to get a dog from a rescue. I live in a townhome and I certainly don't have a fenced yard. But I also have a happy, healthy 18 month old golden who is being trained in obedience and hunt tests. He might be home by himself for 6 hours sometimes, but he survives and gets a long walk/run/ball chasing time when I get home. He is my first thought when I walk in the door.

I think it is sad that the rescues make blanket statements of what you HAVE to have and what you CAN'T do. Do rescues not have time to sit down and talk to perspective adopters to find out what the dogs life would really be like? Walking a dog is probably even better exercise than just having a fenced yard. Fenced yards can encourage complacency: "I'll just let him out and he will exercise himself." 

Don't get me wrong, rescues do amazing work that is generally all volunteer. I just think that there are improvements that can be made. I guess that means I should start volunteering


----------



## Wyatt's mommy

I pretty much have a sour taste in my mouth with rescue organizations also. Had one interview and never heard from them again although they were quick to take my donation. I believe they were turned off because we both work full time. Had another interview set up with another organizaion and they never showed. 
I am now blessed with my second golden thru a lovely breeder thanks to a recommendation from our vet. It saddens me that one of their rescues could have had a wonderful home.........


----------



## C's Mom

No rescue is perfect. I think they have such rules in place for ligitimate reasons via long experience. It may mean that some great adopters miss out, which I am sorry about, but I'd rather be safe than sorry. 
Check out your city's shelter or dog pound - it worked for me. 

PS regarding age: I agree that if you are a fit older person you should be able to have a dog. The problem arises upon death. Having volunteered at our city shelter I have seen some great dogs come in from relatives who said they would care for the dogs but ultimately did not.


----------



## Dallas Gold

mylissyk said:


> I wish people would stop bashing rescues when they don't get what they want. Do you realize they are all volunteer run by people who have full time jobs, full time families, donating their time and energy to help dogs out of bad situations into better homes? Long distance adoptions are logistically difficult, besides having to locate someone they trust, but probably have never met or had contact with, to do a home visit in an area a long distance away, there is also the problem of transporting the dog that far.
> 
> I just wish people that are disappointed would stop and consider if getting irritated with a rescue group is really the right reaction, when all they are doing is working for the best interests of the dogs they are helping.


I don't think anyone in this thread is "bashing" rescues, but expressing disappointment and constructive criticism for some of the policies that at first blush seem arbitrary or ridiculous. Rescue groups do fabulous work and save lives; however, they are run by individuals and sometimes policies need reassessment and tweaking. Expressing frustration and disappointment is not bashing in my opinion.


----------



## Penny & Maggie's Mom

ESRA is the national springer rescue group. It's pretty phenomenal.... state coordinators, but a national group. Their web site shows dogs from all over the country by state. I would guess that with goldens being so popular that sheer numbers may make such a venture impossible. But ESRA started with 2 women.... one a breeder and one a rescuer......food for thought. BTW, I'm pretty high on them since they brought us our sweet Cody.

http://www.springerrescue.org/


----------



## Dallas Gold

Penny & Maggie's Mom said:


> ESRA is the national springer rescue group. It's pretty phenomenal.... state coordinators, but a national group. Their web site shows dogs from all over the country by state. I would guess that with goldens being so popular that sheer numbers may make such a venture impossible. But ESRA started with 2 women.... one a breeder and one a rescuer......food for thought. BTW, I'm pretty high on them since they brought us our sweet Cody.
> 
> English Springer Rescue America


That is a well run organization by the way. Their transports are fabulous!


----------



## LifeOfRiley

Dallas Gold said:


> I don't think anyone in this thread is "bashing" rescues, but expressing disappointment and constructive criticism for some of the policies that at first blush seem arbitrary or ridiculous. Rescue groups do fabulous work and save lives; however, they are run by individuals and sometimes policies need reassessment and tweaking. Expressing frustration and disappointment is not bashing in my opinion.


 
I agree.

And I would add another point, too: I know there are many GREAT rescues out there, but there are some bad ones, too. And I feel that the bad ones should be exposed. Aside from everything else, the bad ones leave people with a negative impression of rescues in general, and it has to make it that much harder for the good ones.


----------



## Calistar

Dallas Gold said:


> Rescue groups have legal title to the dogs before adoption and can establish whatever rules they want to screen potential adopters. They have financial and legal responsibility for them. Most want to make sure dogs aren't kenneled or sheltered outside, Golden rescues especially. If this is your arrangement you will probably do better going through a breeder.
> 
> At rescue adoption meet and greets I've heard people complaining about the spaying/neutering policy (all done before adoptions)...spay/neuter is one of the underlying pre-requisites of most rescues and they aren't going to waive that one!


I certainly understand the desire that the dogs not be kenneled outside. We have been involved in showing and breeding dogs for over 25 years and we have never kenneled a dog anywhere but in the house. Their concern was never expressed as a dislike for outdoor kenneling. We told them the kennel would be in our bedroom and they still threw a fit. Based on years of talking with breeders, I have never found any breeder who shared this fear of this rescue organization. The spay/neuter issue you referred to is a completely different issue. Breeders and rescue organizations alike are very careful in breeding to assure the breed improves and that medical and genetic defects are not passed on. This is a reasonable and understandable policy and any well informed dog owner would understand. But it really is entirely different than the crating issue. While I agree they can make their own rules, they likely do so at the expense of eliminating very good homes.


----------



## Dallas Gold

Calistar said:


> I certainly understand the desire that the dogs not be kenneled outside. We have been involved in showing and breeding dogs for over 25 years and we have never kenneled a dog anywhere but in the house. Their concern was never expressed as a dislike for outdoor kenneling. We told them the kennel would be in our bedroom and they still threw a fit. Based on years of talking with breeders, I have never found any breeder who shared this fear of this rescue organization. The spay/neuter issue you referred to is a completely different issue. Breeders and rescue organizations alike are very careful in breeding to assure the breed improves and that medical and genetic defects are not passed on. This is a reasonable and understandable policy and any well informed dog owner would understand. But it really is entirely different than the crating issue. While I agree they can make their own rules, they likely do so at the expense of eliminating very good homes.


I totally agree with you that they do eliminate a lot of good homes with some of these requirements. I've rescued two Goldens but will no longer do so through one of the local rescues because of a policy that only the rescue group can be on the microchip, even after the adoption. They will not allow adopters to add their names and/or their veterinarian's names and contact information to the microchip. The rationale--it's too hard to check all the microchips if dogs are returned from adopters. First of all, most dogs don't come back once adopted (some do). Second--they should be checking them anyway as a matter of course. We've got a very good security perimeter in place around our home, but in the event one of my dogs does get out and is lost, chances are anyone finding them will take them to the nearest veterinary clinic to be scanned--our veterinary clinic. Even Animal Control takes dogs there from our area to be scanned for chips before transporting to the big shelter downtown. I don't want to wait for a rescue volunteer to listen to a voice mail hotline and then rely on them to find a volunteer to go get the dog--I want to get my dog back ASAP if not sooner. The bottom line--their rules, their game, and I'm perfectly happy to look elsewhere.


----------



## booklady

There are fantastic rescues, there are some pretty bad ones. There are some great breeders and some really bad ones. There are surprisingly good shelters, there are too many hellholes.

In the good rescues, the rules were created because they learned from experience. They are also, usually, a guideline and I've known of exceptions made for most of them. The rescue I've worked with is very large, but completely volunteer...all dogs are in foster homes over a very large area and the foster family is the one who decides both who is the best looking applicant on paper and after meeting who gets the dog. The foster family is the one who knows the dog best and can make the best assessment of what it needs to live the best life possible. The rescue will ALWAYS take the dog back if necessary but the rules give the best chance of that not being necessary.

I've never seen age as a disqualifying factor, but it should be a consideration....not as to whether a senior should be able to adopt, but what would happen if they could no longer care for the animal. I did a home visit to a couple last year in their 80's. They specifically were looking for an older dog because they were concerned about there dog outliving them. Within two weeks of the home visit they had met a wonderful older gentleman, made an instant connection and now the dog is living a great life and the couple couldn't be happier.

Fences. Many dogs coming into rescue have lived on the streets for quite awhile or have a history as runners. The fencing rule is a precaution - it doesn't have to be large, it doesn't have to be fancy....and in some situations it doesn't have to be. I've seen this rule "broken" for seniors and special needs dogs.

No children under 8. It depends on the dog and the child. A family with very young children will probably not be allowed to adopt a small puppy and there are no adoptions to families with children under 12 during the month of December...but there have been adoptions to people with small children and I can't see that changing.

Crate training is strongly recommended by most rescues I'm aware of...I can't help but think that someone heard the word "kennel" and didn't hear the rest of your statement.

I'm sorry about the microchip hard line Ranger...upon adoption (in the rescue I work with) the adopter is added as primary notification with the rescue listed second...and a vet can be added if the adopter wishes. I appreciate anything that would get my dogs home in case of their going missing, God forbid!

I understand that some people have been disappointed with their dealings with various rescues, and there is no excuse for not receiving a response in a timely manner or using the "rules" as gospel in every situation... from the rescue point of view, it's a matter of getting the right dog in the right home with every expectation of a long and happy life for all concerned. Literally, blood, sweat, tears and money have gone into the saving of these lives - all very worth it when the right connection is made but the rescue volunteers are the advocates for the dogs and they are the ones who have to pick up the pieces if it all falls apart.


----------



## mylissyk

mlopez said:


> I think this discussion is very interesting. I understand that the rescues are focused on the well being of the dogs. However, when this focus goes too far, it actually denies these dogs the possibility of getting great homes. And that keeps the rescues from being able to rescue more dogs because they do not have enough foster homes. Then these rejected people go and buy puppies. And maybe they get puppies from great, reputable breeders, and that's great. But maybe they get a pup from a no-so great breeder. Then we are just perpetuating the problem.
> 
> I know that I would never qualify to get a dog from a rescue. I live in a townhome and I certainly don't have a fenced yard. But I also have a happy, healthy 18 month old golden who is being trained in obedience and hunt tests. He might be home by himself for 6 hours sometimes, but he survives and gets a long walk/run/ball chasing time when I get home. He is my first thought when I walk in the door.
> 
> I think it is sad that the rescues make blanket statements of what you HAVE to have and what you CAN'T do. Do rescues not have time to sit down and talk to perspective adopters to find out what the dogs life would really be like? Walking a dog is probably even better exercise than just having a fenced yard. Fenced yards can encourage complacency: "I'll just let him out and he will exercise himself."
> 
> Don't get me wrong, rescues do amazing work that is generally all volunteer. I just think that there are improvements that can be made. I guess that means I should start volunteering


You would not be rejected because you live in a townhome with the rescue I volunteer for. A dog was just adopted in Dec to a couple in a condo, no yard, but active people dedicated to the proper care of the dog. We do always consider the lifestyle of the adopters, would rather adopt to a townhome or condo with family that will provide the right exerice and socialization, than to a fenced yard home that we know would never take the dog out of the yard.


----------



## mylissyk

Wyatt's mommy said:


> I pretty much have a sour taste in my mouth with rescue organizations also. Had one interview and never heard from them again although they were quick to take my donation. I believe they were turned off because we both work full time. Had another interview set up with another organizaion and they never showed.
> I am now blessed with my second golden thru a lovely breeder thanks to a recommendation from our vet. It saddens me that one of their rescues could have had a wonderful home.........


Did you try to contact them again? Keep in mind, all volunteer run, and every volunteer has a full time life too. No one is perfect, things can slip through the cracks unintentionally. It also helps the coordinators if an applicant makes efforts to show they are serious and will work with the rescue's process.


----------



## Calistar

Dallas Gold said:


> I totally agree with you that they do eliminate a lot of good homes with some of these requirements. I've rescued two Goldens but will no longer do so through one of the local rescues because of a policy that only the rescue group can be on the microchip, even after the adoption. They will not allow adopters to add their names and/or their veterinarian's names and contact information to the microchip. The rationale--it's too hard to check all the microchips if dogs are returned from adopters. First of all, most dogs don't come back once adopted (some do). Second--they should be checking them anyway as a matter of course. We've got a very good security perimeter in place around our home, but in the event one of my dogs does get out and is lost, chances are anyone finding them will take them to the nearest veterinary clinic to be scanned--our veterinary clinic. Even Animal Control takes dogs there from our area to be scanned for chips before transporting to the big shelter downtown. I don't want to wait for a rescue volunteer to listen to a voice mail hotline and then rely on them to find a volunteer to go get the dog--I want to get my dog back ASAP if not sooner. The bottom line--their rules, their game, and I'm perfectly happy to look elsewhere.


Well said Dallas Gold. Once we understood it was their rules, their game, we also were perfectly happy to look elsewhere. Your microchip example was just another example of common sense not being very common among far too many rescue organizations.


----------



## Deber

What we found was the first place we were referred to had few younger rescues (we asked for 3-6 yr old). They had two but when I told them we were just hitting 60 they said that they would rather place a 8-10 yr old with us, but none available at that time. When I asked they said that 60 was at the high age end of their placement scale. They recommended another organization. I told them our age right off, they said they prefered to place pure bred goldens to families who were a bit younger, but offered to keep us on the list if an old golden came in. 

I was a bit put off, no interview, no consideration of our lifestyle and what we could give a dog in need. When did 60 become old?? I still swear by these places, but sad their rules, in the two we dealt with, were so unbending. Feel you should meet, interview and evaluate everyone who is seriously wanting a rescue.


----------



## elly

mylissyk said:


> I wonder if they misunderstood the term "kennel" to mean outside kennel runs, and didn't realize you meant indoor crates.
> 
> I wish people would stop bashing rescues when they don't get what they want. Do you realize they are all volunteer run by people who have full time jobs, full time families, donating their time and energy to help dogs out of bad situations into better homes?
> I just wish people that are disappointed would stop and consider if getting irritated with a rescue group is really the right reaction, when all they are doing is working for the best interests of the dogs they are helping.


I'm not sure thats entirely fair in this instance, the poster was offering 'an idle thought' on their experience and how they felt the system could improve..no voluntary or charitable organisation should ever stop looking at ways of improving their services simply because they are run by volunteers BECAUSE they are voluntary/charitable they should always be open to looking at ways of improvement, ways of listening to their service users and ways of linking with fellow organisations to work together and more openly to ensure that the money they are given is put to the best possible use and benefits the most users in the most positive way. I am qualified to say this as I am a founder and director of one,although for humans with a medical need not animals and no matter where in the world any of our organisations are, our responsibilities remain the same to those we need to help, ..look at what we are doing and how we can improve it to ensure we are doing it the best we can. Just because something is run by volunteers is no excuse to not maximise all opportunities and possibilities..its run by volunteers because its a voluntary organisation..sometmes with some paid staff and sometimes not,..but it doesnt mean its allowed to be half hearted if it doesn have paid staff. When we just have volunteers we have to work even harder and work more with linking with other organisations and form partnership working, it sounds as if that could be the case with some of the rescues. Its far too easy to fall into the ' we are run by volunteers so dont blame us for not changing our ways'. I know its not easy, believe me, oh my, 
there are times I havent slept for what seemed weeks because of responsibilities and worry and workload,..all voluntary, but no one said it would be and after all, the most needy causes are often the ones no one wants and thats why we have to form these organisations. My other half is co-ordinator for another and co-ordinates the volunteers county wide, often a nightmare that keeps him away from us late in the evening but they are constantly looking at ways of how this can be improved and hes always meeting with fellow organisations to discuss shared links, expert knowledge and partnership working.
All volunteers are fabulous and do a stirling job but not all organisations are as great, even those they volunteer for and to point out thoughts about what someone feels is wrong I dont feel is always about bashing because they didnt get what they want and definately isnt constructive to see it that way. I hope the poster will be letting the rescue kmow their thoughts as nothing can ever have a hope in changing without doing so, the same applies to everyone else who has had an issue.


----------



## Dallas Gold

deleting post intentionally.


----------



## Calistar

I tried to make the case to the local rescue organization that I have here. However, they simply chose to view it as a challenge to their rules rather than constructive criticism. Sadly I must say that such an attitude has too long been prevalent in the dog world. At first we decided to remain quiet and compliant. However, after considering that we were the ones taking the biggest risk adopting a golden with an unknown background who might ultimately have a high chance of requiring expensive shoulder surgery, we simply decided that although we would have preferred the stress of puppy training, it was the more sensible approach. However, once we decided to move on, we have not considered passing our thoughts on to the rescue organization. They have their position on ideas differing from their own perfectly clear. Life is too short to deal with people and organizations like that.


----------



## Dallas Gold

A member who is the microchip coordinator for the rescue I referenced in an earlier post has given me the "official" reasoning for this group's microchip policy:



> The reason it's done that way is because there have been multiple dogs found in shelters, scanned, the rescue called, and then the adopters either could not be found or they did not want the dog anymore and didn't care where it ended up. It also gives the rescue the oppotunity to talk to the adopter and make sure everything is ok, find out why the dog was out and get the problem resolved, if they do want the dog back. It has helped dogs safely stay in their adoption on more than one occasion. Keeping the chips registered to the rescue is done specifically as a safety net for the dogs.


Despite this reason, which I concede works for the rescue to the detriment of the adoptive (legal) owners, I continue to believe it's in the best interests of the dogs to allow the adopters to add their contact information and that of their veterinary clinic, to the chips. Because this particular group will not permit this to happen, it precludes us from applying to adopt.


----------



## goldensrbest

I would love to adopt,in the future, but doubt if i would be appproved, one age, two ,invisable fence.


----------



## Calistar

goldensrbest

It always saddens me to hear that rescue organizations use age as a criteria for deciding about good homes because it seems to me that their criteria is generally way too young. In general the average age of a rescue golden that comes through our local rescue club is about 5 years old. Now let's face it, These rescue dogs in general are not in the healthiest condition so they may have a life expectancy of another 7-8 years. Unless an older person already exhibits poor health, their is no reason that someone in their late 60's or older automatically cannot provide a good home, They are likely to have fewer things competing for their time and can provide the dog with more interaction and love than a busier young couple who may find it necessary for both parents to work leaving the kids to tend to the dog. I hear excuses that their rules are based on experience. Translated that means we had this one situation that if we had this rule it would have prevented it from happening. But it is like any set of rules. You can't write down all the criteria that would prevent a bad outcome 100% of the time (unless you just don't let anyone adopt). My attitude toward these "age rules" Is that it would be far better to get more mature owners to agree that they dog will be returned to the rescue organization for placement if they find themselves no longer capable of caring for a dog. But sadly I have not found common sense in overabundance at many of these rescue organizations...not all necessarily ...but still far too many.

I noticed that you said "in the future". Is it possible to adopt now and avoid that issue providing a dog if you have one a new friend? I would think that you might overcome the fence issue by not mentioning it since I know of rescue organizations that adopt out to condo owners. What ever happens best of luck and Happy New Year!


----------



## GinnyinPA

Re: Age - not all of the golden rescue groups have a problem with older adopters. My husband is 72 and we had no problem getting approved by two rescue groups. Of course, we are normally very active and I am younger than he is by a fair bit, but nobody suggested we try for older dogs only.


----------



## Calistar

GinnyinPA said:


> Re: Age - not all of the golden rescue groups have a problem with older adopters. My husband is 72 and we had no problem getting approved by two rescue groups. Of course, we are normally very active and I am younger than he is by a fair bit, but nobody suggested we try for older dogs only.


It is not rescue organizations that don't discriminate because of age we are discussing. I did not mean to imply that all rescue organizations did that. But the fact that it may not be a universal problem does not lessen the fact it is a sad policy for both people and dogs that some rescue organizations do follow that needs to be corrected. Ignoring such a policy simply because it is not a universal problem of rescue organizations allows poorly run organizations to hide their mistakes to the detriment of the dogs and people who want to adopt them.


----------



## Wyatt's mommy

goldensrbest said:


> I would love to adopt,in the future, but doubt if i would be appproved, one age, two ,*invisable fence*.


I know for a fact the rescue that interviewed us would not approve of this. And no way of getting around it as they do inspect your home.


----------



## Calistar

Is their logic that the invisible fence does not work or that they don't approve of the training method it employs? My only experience with them was neighbors in Louisiana who had one and it simply did not contain their dog which was short legged mixed breed and about 35 pounds.


----------



## booklady

I think a big concern is that although an invisible fence may contain a dog within a given area, it doesn't keep out potential preditors or other loose dogs. Also, if the dog does break the barrier, it might be too afraid to cross back to come home.


----------



## goldensrbest

I have had the invisable fence,at at this house, and our last house, total of about 14 years, we have had good luck with them, both homes were in areas that, were not heavyly populated, or busy roads, it has worked well for us, not looking to adopt,for several years.


----------



## BriGuy

Calistar said:


> Is their logic that the invisible fence does not work or that they don't approve of the training method it employs? My only experience with them was neighbors in Louisiana who had one and it simply did not contain their dog which was short legged mixed breed and about 35 pounds.


Here is the quote from the Yankee Golden Retriever Rescue website (*) regarding invisible fences:

*"Rationale*
_Over the years it has become clear that the vast majority of dogs that come though Rescue are not appropriate candidates for this type of containment._
_This is not a reflection on the many dog owners who choose to utilize Invisible/Hidden fencing, rather a reflection on the background, experiences, and behavior of the typical rescue dog that comes through our program."_

I infer from this that many of the recues had been runaways in the past, and these types of fences are not reliable enough for some dogs.

* YGRR Adoption - Adoption Information and Procedure - Yankee Golden Retriever Rescue


----------



## GinnyinPA

Both the rescue groups that approved us knew we had an invisible fence. As it turns out, we don't use it, but they both allowed e-fences with some dogs. I think the difference in some cases is that if a dog was picked up as a stray, it probably ran away from home. If a dog was turned over by the owners, then it may not be a runner. Many of our neighbors use an invisible fence very successfully. There is a great dane on one side of us, a shihtsu, a husky and a samoyed on the other that spend all day outside. When I run, I see a lot of dogs behind e-fences. But given Ben's high pain threshold and high prey drive, I'm not willing to trust it.


----------



## Calistar

What I am hearing once again is that the use of e-fences can be appropriate and outright bans are likely not justifiable. Hopefully by the time anyone decides to adopt this will be accepted by your local rescue group as a common sense approach.


----------



## Rivs

We just went through the process and are very disappointed. We had our home visit. The rescue brought a dog to see our current dog interact (he just loves other dogs). Everything went great. The rescue reviewed and called, we were approved. Only thing left to do is to find a match and bring one home. Then 3 days later they called and we were now unapproved. The reason given, we have a boxer. The vice pres saw our info, and she "had a bad experience with a boxer in her past". So she won't adopt to us. But, she didn't even talk to us, talk to the trainer we use, see our dog interact, anything. We had already gone out and bought supplies to be ready when we found a match. Really surprising, "Boxers and Goldens are not a good match" because she had a bad experience. My boxer is the most lovable goofball, not a mean bone in his body. The golden they brought got along with his very well. So, we are looking at other options. We want to do the honorable thing and rescue, but we just don't get it...


----------



## Dallas Gold

Rivs said:


> We just went through the process and are very disappointed. We had our home visit. The rescue brought a dog to see our current dog interact (he just loves other dogs). Everything went great. The rescue reviewed and called, we were approved. Only thing left to do is to find a match and bring one home. Then 3 days later they called and we were now unapproved. The reason given, we have a boxer. The vice pres saw our info, and she "had a bad experience with a boxer in her past". So she won't adopt to us. But, she didn't even talk to us, talk to the trainer we use, see our dog interact, anything. We had already gone out and bought supplies to be ready when we found a match. Really surprising, "Boxers and Goldens are not a good match" because she had a bad experience. My boxer is the most lovable goofball, not a mean bone in his body. The golden they brought got along with his very well. So, we are looking at other options. We want to do the honorable thing and rescue, but we just don't get it...


I'm very sorry, for you and for the rescue because with policies like that they are limiting the pool of good adopters for their dogs. The dogs lose in the end. My Golden is friendly with a boxer in our neighborhood--a very nice dog with a great temperament. I was not aware this breed is a problematic breed. This woman's personal experience is detrimentally affecting their rescue. I hope you can find another group to try, and hopefully they don't have an officer or coordinator with a breed prejudice.


----------



## Rivs

Thanks. We are going to try the other Golden Rescue in our area, we have been approved there as well, at least the last time we talked to them we were. We were really disappointed, but we will find a new family member at some point. If they want to have policies like that, I will not understand it, but that is their choice I guess. But they certainly knew what kind of dog we owned when they read my app and then took my check for the home visit, they really shouldn't take our money knowing all along we wouldn't be able to adopt according to the "no boxer rule".


----------



## Calistar

Dallas Gold said:


> I'm very sorry, for you and for the rescue because with policies like that they are limiting the pool of good adopters for their dogs. The dogs lose in the end. My Golden is friendly with a boxer in our neighborhood--a very nice dog with a great temperament. I was not aware this breed is a problematic breed. This woman's personal experience is detrimentally affecting their rescue. *I hope you can find another group to try, and hopefully they don't have an officer or coordinator with a breed prejudice*.


Sadly most groups will not adopt to people that live more than 100 miles from where they are located. Except in huge metropolitan areas, most people are left with only a single agency to deal with. I realize these people are volunteers, but i am finding more and more the local policies are simply set based on random experience and personal prejudices of the people that run the rescue service which often run in direct opposition to the majority opinion. I am sure the scope would be more than they are willing to take on but the national Golden retriever Club needs to either assume oversight of these organizations or improve whatever oversight it currently has. Volunteer ignorance is becoming the single biggest obstacle to finding good homes for these wonderful dogs


----------



## Dallas Gold

Calistar said:


> Sadly most groups will not adopt to people that live more than 100 miles from where they are located. Except in huge metropolitan areas, most people are left with only a single agency to deal with. I realize these people are volunteers, but i am finding more and more the local policies are simply set based on random experience and personal prejudices of the people that run the rescue service which often run in direct opposition to the majority opinion. I am sure the scope would be more than they are willing to take on* but the national Golden retriever Club needs to either assume oversight of these organizations or improve whatever oversight it currently has. *Volunteer ignorance is becoming the single biggest obstacle to finding good homes for these wonderful dogs


Most are independent, do not take money from the GRCA, and are run independently. They report statistics to the group, but are run totally independently. Assuming oversight for them is not possible.

There are other adoption options that do not involve a rescue group. Check Petfinder, Craigs list, or contact shelters and veterinarian offices with your interest in a Golden Retriever if you cannot find a rescue willing to adopt to you. I know of at least one suburban shelter here that gives priority to individuals willing to adopt over rescues (there are others that have the opposite policy). I actually went there to pick up a Golden for the rescue, but a family was there looking at the dog. The shelter staff told me they had first priority so we went outside and I discussed Goldens with them and gave them an idea about what owning one would be like, and when they decided to adopt him I gave them the rescue card and suggested if they adopt and it didn't work out they could contact the rescue. I think it was a great match for them. I've also had my veterinarian clinic call me to ask if I was looking for another Golden. Sometimes veterinarian clinics have other clients who need to get rid of them for whatever reason.


----------



## CAROLINA MOM

I must be missing something here, what's wrong with Boxers? My neighbors have a golden and a boxer, they get along great, the Boxer is a huge goofball.

Go to *Petfinder.com* and do a search for a Golden Retriever, you might get lucky and find one in an area shelter or Humane Society. I adopted my Remy from my County Humane Society.


----------



## LifeOfRiley

Rivs said:


> We just went through the process and are very disappointed. We had our home visit. The rescue brought a dog to see our current dog interact (he just loves other dogs). Everything went great. The rescue reviewed and called, we were approved. Only thing left to do is to find a match and bring one home. Then 3 days later they called and we were now unapproved. The reason given, we have a boxer. The vice pres saw our info, and she "had a bad experience with a boxer in her past". So she won't adopt to us. But, she didn't even talk to us, talk to the trainer we use, see our dog interact, anything. We had already gone out and bought supplies to be ready when we found a match. Really surprising, "Boxers and Goldens are not a good match" because she had a bad experience. My boxer is the most lovable goofball, not a mean bone in his body. The golden they brought got along with his very well. So, we are looking at other options. We want to do the honorable thing and rescue, but we just don't get it...


I had no idea that Boxers were considered to be a problem, either. We have several of them here in our complex and they're all very nice, even-tempered dogs. One of my neighborhood favorites is a big white/brindle guy named Chuck. What a lovebug! He's fantastic with other dogs, with the exception of one and (oddly enough) it's another Golden. He never reacts to my Riley or to another Golden who lives here, but for some reason, he does not like this other one. Knowing Chuck, though, I would have to think that it has a lot more to do with this particular Golden than it does with him.

I hope you have better luck with the other rescue. Hopefully they won't judge an entire breed based on a bad experience with one particular dog.


----------



## Rivs

CAROLINA MOM said:


> I must be missing something here, what's wrong with Boxers? My neighbors have a golden and a boxer, they get along great, the Boxer is a huge goofball.
> 
> Go to *Petfinder.com* and do a search for a Golden Retriever, you might get lucky and find one in an area shelter or Humane Society. I adopted my Remy from my County Humane Society.


Our question to them was why boxers, and we were told that she had a bad experience. The lady basically left it for the assistant to tell us, she didn't even bother to speak to us directly. We were told she had a hard time training one in the past. I work with a trainer CPDT trainer and he sure isn't afraid to train our boxer, but I feel this person must have a bruised ego or something. We are looking at Petfinder, etc. We will find one. It was just such an odd experience to us.


----------



## Maggies mom

Every rescue has different rules. We do require some type of fencing, but we have made exceptions to that rule. A lot depends on the dog. We will not adopt a stray to a family with young kids, due to no history on the dog. As for older people, again depends on which dog,. as for spaying and neuter if the rescue is a 5013c and has a lic, by state law there require to spay etc before we can adopt them out.


----------



## Dallas Gold

Rivs said:


> Our question to them was why boxers, and we were told that she had a bad experience. The lady basically left it for the assistant to tell us, she didn't even bother to speak to us directly. We were told she had a hard time training one in the past. I work with a trainer CPDT trainer and he sure isn't afraid to train our boxer, but I feel this person must have a bruised ego or something. We are looking at Petfinder, etc. We will find one. It was just such an odd experience to us.


I hope you find exactly the perfect Golden from the other means. It sounds as though you are a savvy dog owner since you work with a trainer, and have already trained your boxer. I really find it bizarre if the VP didn't visit your home personally and just saw the fact you own a boxer on your application. What a shame for the rescue dogs. Like you said, it was an odd experience and sad to think the dogs in that rescue lost the opportunity to find a forever home with your family. Good luck in your search!


----------



## Calistar

I don't think there was anything missed. What you can see from the comments is that these organizations are run by volunteers who although they should be commended for their effort, are all too frequently making rules based on limited personal experience and prejudices. This in turn disqualifies far too many good adoptive homes without true justification. As with the case of the boxer, one bad incident does not imply that the two breeds are incompatible. I am certain that if we looked hard enough, you could find incidences with almost every breed. So what should we conclude from that? That goldens are simply no adoptable into homes with any other breed other than goldens. 

THe GRCA should become more involved in certifying these rescue organizations to create uniformity among adopting rules based on sound supportable consistent experience and not the experience of just a few people in a local area. 

We had our own experiences with rescue organizations who would not approve any home that used of a crate for anything other potty training. And yet, every vet we have spoken to for over 25 years and breeders of a wide number of breeds including goldens saw it as essential to assuring a well behaved dog of any breed. Given the risks that a potential adoptive family is taking, you would think that thee volunteers would be more cooperative. Instead far too many of these volunteers with limited professional training have become intoxicated with the power their position gives them. My position is not that I would not contact a rescue organization to adopt. but at the first sign of unreasonable and unsupportable requirements, I would simply walk the other way if my offer to provide one of these lovely creatures a good forever home is treated with such an attitude.


----------



## mylissyk

You are so far off base, and completely insulting. I am a volunteer with Golden rescue, I am certainly not intoxicated with power and no one I work with is either. The rules we use are based on YEARS of experience, not random events, not prejudice, and they were developed by knowledgeable, thoughtful people who go to great lengths to consider all the ramifications before putting the rules in place. They are not arbitrary nor unreasonable.

Instead of insulting and condemning rescue groups for rules you disagree with, get up and go volunteer for one, get inside the process and observe for long enough to see the horror stories that prompted putting the rules in place, before you start calling names and condemning something you obviously know nothing about.


----------



## mylissyk

Rivs said:


> We just went through the process and are very disappointed. We had our home visit. The rescue brought a dog to see our current dog interact (he just loves other dogs). Everything went great. The rescue reviewed and called, we were approved. Only thing left to do is to find a match and bring one home. Then 3 days later they called and we were now unapproved. The reason given, we have a boxer. The vice pres saw our info, and she "had a bad experience with a boxer in her past". So she won't adopt to us. But, she didn't even talk to us, talk to the trainer we use, see our dog interact, anything. We had already gone out and bought supplies to be ready when we found a match. Really surprising, "Boxers and Goldens are not a good match" because she had a bad experience. My boxer is the most lovable goofball, not a mean bone in his body. The golden they brought got along with his very well. So, we are looking at other options. We want to do the honorable thing and rescue, but we just don't get it...


That was definitely not a good reason to deny you adopting. It's not any better than breed bans. I'm sorry that individual was allowed to make the decision. I hope you find the right dog for your family very soon.


----------



## Dallas Gold

Calistar, I also think you are being unfair by painting all rescue groups with such a broad brush of black paint. There are good rescue groups and there are bad ones. There are good groups with a rule or two that may have unintended consequences. The bottom line is they are run by individuals (not the GRCA--not sure why you think they have jurisdiction over totally independent organizations that may not receive monetary support from them). Sometimes these individuals have policies that need tweaking or revisions, and that's where the members and other volunteers can help. I agree with Mylissyk, you should probably volunteer with one of them so you can better understand how they operate and why they make some of these rules. You may not agree with all of them--I certainly didn't and I volunteered for several years with one group I think provides an invaluable service for my area of the state. The majority of these groups have reasonable standards and adoption rules in place. It's just not fair to label all of them with such a bad rap based on what a few groups do wrong. The alternative is much much worse--dogs losing their lives to euthanasia because shelters are overcrowded, or owners throwing them in the garage or back yard, ignoring them and letting them live lonely sad lives. It would be a sadder world without the things these groups accomplish.


----------



## Calistar

I did not mean to imply the GRCA HAD control over these groups. What I was saying is that it would be better for the breed if the knowledge of the GRCA DID hold some oversight role over rescue prganizations . As far as the randomness of these bad decisions, there seems to be several examples on this forum to indicate that many of these groups are not well run. It just seems that there should be a basic set of adoption guidelines used by all golden rescue organizations that could be amended for area specific situations. The GrCA would seem to be the best place for such overarching guidelines to be developed . That would eliminate the breed specific refusals, refusals based on age of adopting family, refusals based on crate use, etc. I am thinking of something like not allowing digs to be kept outside where the temperatures are sub zero as a location specific amendment. 

I am sure many of these organizations are well run. But there seem to be an adequate number of poorly run ones that hide in the shadow of the well run organizations and to criticize people for commenting on those that are poorly run and accuse them of saying that their comments were meant for all rescue organizations is off base. If the poorly run organizations are allowed to hide in the shadows without being called out in fear that correctly run organizations will be offended, then the real losers are the goldens. Bbad behavior on the part of golden rescue organizations is not a place where political correctness should take precedence over the well being of the dog. As such, I really don't think we are as far apart as you seem to think


----------



## Calistar

mylissyk said:


> You are so far off base, and completely insulting. I am a volunteer with Golden rescue, I am certainly not intoxicated with power and no one I work with is either. The rules we use are based on YEARS of experience, not random events, not prejudice, and they were developed by knowledgeable, thoughtful people who go to great lengths to consider all the ramifications before putting the rules in place. They are not arbitrary nor unreasonable.
> 
> Instead of insulting and condemning rescue groups for rules you disagree with, get up and go volunteer for one, get inside the process and observe for long enough to see the horror stories that prompted putting the rules in place, before you start calling names and condemning something you obviously know nothing about.


You need to stop wearing your feelings on your sleeve and ask if you would have made any of the decisions referenced here. My comments were not directed at all rescue organizations nor the many good volunteers. My comment on intoxication with power actually was a quote from a rescue volunteer about people in her own organization. Just because it may not apply to you or even your organization does not mean it does not exist. And by acting offended and trying to squelch a discussion of poorly run organizations and poor volunteers undermines the very job you set out to do. remember this is about the dogs...not the people. So unless you have proof that there is absolutely no instance of what people on this thread have complained about, your self indulgent irritation is placing you above the well being of dogs.

You say the rules we use are based on YEARS of experience, not random events, not prejudice, and they were developed by knowledgeable, thoughtful people who go to great lengths to consider all the ramifications before putting the rules in place. They are not arbitrary nor unreasonable. Then how do you explain the wide variation over things like not allowing crates to be used, not adopting to people in their sixties, and not adopting to homes with boxers that we have heard about on this thread. Such variation proves that the knowledge base used for some organizations is limited and based on personal experience which is not widespread or these rules would be more widely held.

It is an interesting concept that you believe you can put rules in place to prevent every horror story. I submit you cannot write a rule that cannot result in abuse or unintended consequences. But you can write an overly restrictive set of rules in trying to prevent every abuse that could have ever been inexperienced or imagined that lack common sense and only accomplish one thing...turning down good adoptive homes.

I speak from the crate perspective. I have been involved in breeding, showing and owning dogs for 25 years. An overwhelming majority of the people I know believe that when a dog is left unattended such as at night or when a family is gone for a while, the dog should be placed in a properly sized kennel and not left to roam the house. This is done in the best interest of the dog so it does not get into something that could harm it when no one is home to help. And lets not forget that dogs were originally pack animals that slept in small protected places and not in open areas. Yet my local rescue group considers plans to have a properly sized crate for a dog to sleep in as grounds for not approving an adoptive home. Such a decision flies in the face of the thinking a majority of dogdom whether show breeders, veterinarians, trainers, or general fans of the breeds. Such rules are far from based on YEARS of experience and the fact they do not represent the majority of thinking in the dog world suggests they were not developed by knowledgeable, thoughtful people who went to great lengths to consider all the ramifications before putting the rules in place. 

As I said to Dallas Gold,my comments are not to trash all rescue organizations. They are simply to point out that there are some organizations out there who hide their bad policy making behind the organizations who run their operations correctly. To get upset over those organizations and people being called out is to put the welfare of the breed secondary to the feelings of those that are doing the breed no favors by arbitrarily turning down good homes based on rules that are not widely accepted in the dog world.


----------



## Angelina

Interesting discussion. We worked with a well known rescue who continually told us they had a dog for us and then the lady would say "but we found a better home" for almost a year! We were so fustrated I searched the ads for a puppy even though I knew ours was not an ideal situation for a pup but instead I found Angelina who was 14 months old...it was just meant to be. I called up the Craigslist lady not 5 minutes after she posted the ad, spoke with her for about 30 minutes and she committed to us. Later on, I found out the lady running the rescue was also a breeder...***???

Years later and I rescue Cannella from a private owner who was keeping her in their garage and teaching her nothing. I contacted another rescue which I will name; Homeward Bound, and found their organization to be the most sane one I've ever run across. If I needed to turn her in because she was too much to handle I would be welcomed to adopt a lower energy dog that they would fit to my family. I would not be penalized for working full time which is the main issue (I have a dog walker). I kept Cannella; but will be looking to them when the time comes.

So I think rescues are all different and usually run by their board of directors. One should not label them the same, because they are not but I definately understand the fustration of dealing with them. I've had friends buy puppies because the rescues were so demanding on how they intended to raise their dog (my cousin in PA when she told them they don't allow dogs on the furniture...rescued rejected them).

Oh, and they are not all run from full time working volunteers. Many have retired folk, house wives or even part timers working for them. They are doing what they think is best for the dog; unfortunately it can and does backfire. And with anything run by humans; there will be egos influencing decisions. That is also why it is important to research the rescue before applying...are they truly a non-profit and run by a board etc....


----------



## Dallas Gold

Calistar said:


> I did not mean to imply the GRCA HAD control over these groups. What I was saying is that it would be better for the breed if the knowledge of the GRCA DID hold some oversight role over rescue prganizations . As far as the randomness of these bad decisions, there seems to be several examples on this forum to indicate that many of these groups are not well run. It just seems that there should be a basic set of adoption guidelines used by all golden rescue organizations that could be amended for area specific situations. The GrCA would seem to be the best place for such overarching guidelines to be developed . That would eliminate the breed specific refusals, refusals based on age of adopting family, refusals based on crate use, etc. I am thinking of something like not allowing digs to be kept outside where the temperatures are sub zero as a location specific amendment.


Since you were a breeder, I assume you were (and maybe still are) a member in good standing of the GRCA. I suggest you propose the GRCA adopt adoption guidelines to circulate to Golden Rescue organizations. Perhaps seeing what the GRCA suggests might cause some discussion and change at these totally independent groups, that are independently run. My guess is they will go in the big round recycling bin at the ones that are ingrained with their own set of rules and run by those intoxicated with their own power (to use your words). I just don't see practically how the GRCA could "suggest" rules and expect anyone to comply.


----------



## Calistar

I was a Doberman breeder in California up until the mid-1990's when my job require we relocate. I have not been a DPCA member since then despite continuing to own Dobies. However, i know how these national clubs work. You need to have a reputation to get things done and not having owned a golden until now, I have not been a member of the GRCA.

I agree with what you say about these poorly run rescue groups. but my take would be somewhat different. I would like to see the GRCA develop a set of adoption criteria that they would then require rescue groups rescue groups to utilize in order for the rescue group to receive GRCA certification. The adoption rules would be available on the GRCA website and certified rescue groups could have complaints filed with the GRCA against their certification if they did not follow such rules. I realize that this would be a large undertaking for the GRCA and frankly it may not be totally aligned with their goals of improving breed quality since I would imagine most (but certainly not all) of the rescue dogs do not have traits that the GRCA wants perpetuated. This is not an issue that an outsider is going to be able to gain much traction with inside the GRCA given the large amount of work and time required to implement the program. Alternatively, if the better run rescue groups could start a certifying oversight organization, that might be an answer. But again a lot of work for an organization that is essentially staffed by only volunteers. Sadly, these less qualified rescue groups are likely to continue to operate based on their own personal prejudices simply due to the effort required to police them. Still, forums like this provide an outlet for criticism of the inappropriate behavior of some rescue groups and may gradually bring about change. If nothing else it will help educate the public about the possible range of outcomes when dealing with a rescue groups. 

One more idle thought. The unwillingness of many rescue groups to accept the evaluation of homes for suitability by rescue groups outside their area, speaks volumes about what these groups already understand about the quality of some of their supposedly peer groups in other geographic locations.


----------



## Dallas Gold

Calistar said:


> I was a Doberman breeder in California up until the mid-1990's when my job require we relocate. I have not been a DPCA member since then despite continuing to own Dobies. However, i know how these national clubs work. You need to have a reputation to get things done and not having owned a golden until now, I have not been a member of the GRCA.
> 
> I agree with what you say about these poorly run rescue groups. but my take would be somewhat different. I would like to see the GRCA develop a set of adoption criteria that they would then require rescue groups rescue groups to utilize in order for the rescue group to receive GRCA certification. The adoption rules would be available on the GRCA website and certified rescue groups could have complaints filed with the GRCA against their certification if they did not follow such rules. I realize that this would be a large undertaking for the GRCA and frankly it may not be totally aligned with their goals of improving breed quality since I would imagine most (but certainly not all) of the rescue dogs do not have traits that the GRCA wants perpetuated. This is not an issue that an outsider is going to be able to gain much traction with inside the GRCA given the large amount of work and time required to implement the program. Alternatively, if the better run rescue groups could start a certifying oversight organization, that might be an answer. But again a lot of work for an organization that is essentially staffed by only volunteers. Sadly, these less qualified rescue groups are likely to continue to operate based on their own personal prejudices simply due to the effort required to police them. Still, forums like this provide an outlet for criticism of the inappropriate behavior of some rescue groups and may gradually bring about change. If nothing else it will help educate the public about the possible range of outcomes when dealing with a rescue groups.
> 
> One more idle thought. The unwillingness of many rescue groups to accept the evaluation of homes for suitability by rescue groups outside their area, speaks volumes about what these groups already understand about the quality of some of their supposedly peer groups in other geographic locations.


I guess I don't see how GRCA could force a totally independent rescue group to agree to do anything different. It would create more paperwork and oversight. Why would they do it? I wouldn't if I were running a group and receiving enough through donations to sustain my operation without needing anything from GRCA. True, they do offer grants to rescue groups, but if my group were successful and not dependent on these grants to operate, what is the incentive to submit to more oversight and regulation? It means more volunteer time, and volunteers are already overworked. None of the golden groups I know have paid staff, but rely solely on volunteer time. I just think you are chasing windmills, to borrow from Don Quixote. 

I've actually been asked to evaluate an adoptive home by an out of area group so I don't understand your final idle thought, insofar as my own personal experience with rescue work is concerned. I also know the local group here adopted a dog to someone in El Paso, several hundred miles away and asked another group to find a volunteer to do the home inspection. Again, not all groups are so inflexible as to not look at those outside their geographic areas.


----------



## mylissyk

Again, sign up to volunteer, foster, transport, home visit, etc., for a rescue organization and find out from the inside why things are done the way they are. You will find out that things are drastically different than the narrow view you hold.

If you really want to rail against something that is detrimental to dogs, start blasting puppy mills with the same venom you display toward rescue, at least puppy mills deserve it.

Which rescue group told you they would not adopt to a home that intended to crate the dog? I would very interested in contacting them to ask if that is their policy.


----------



## Calistar

mylissyk said:


> Again, sign up to volunteer, foster, transport, home visit, etc., for a rescue organization and find out from the inside why things are done the way they are. You will find out that things are drastically different than the narrow view you hold.
> 
> If you really want to rail against something that is detrimental to dogs, start blasting puppy mills with the same venom you display toward rescue, at least puppy mills deserve it.
> 
> Which rescue group told you they would not adopt to a home that intended to crate the dog? I would very interested in contacting them to ask if that is their policy.


Again I am sure your perspective is that from that of a well run organization. But that gives you little insight on how a poorly run operation might conduct it's business. I resent your calling my view narrow just because our experiences differ. 

Your own arrogance is showing when you say that you want to call my local rescue group to find out if the crate policy I portrayed is actually their policy. Where do you dare get the arrogance to assume my command of the English language is so insufficient that I cannot understand when I am directly told that they will not approve our home if we crate our dogs at night or when we are gone? Your reaction is basically accusing me of not telling the truth despite any evidence to the contrary and implying for it to be true you have to hear it with your own ears. So what if you do hear it as I portrayed it? What difference would it make to you? If you really were interested in finding that out as opposed to simply being insulting, you could just have looked at my profile and see where I am located and make the call yourself. But don't bother to respond with your results if you cannot be a little more civil and less arrogant with your tone. I know what I was told and have e-mails to back it up.

With regard to puppy mills, this is a rescue forum so this is not the place for that discussion.

Again, I think you are personalizing criticism of poorly run golden rescue organizations which clearly exist with no one ever having directed the criticism at you specifically. Makes me wonder however if your reaction does not indicate that the criticism hits close to home!


----------



## Rivs

We ended up going to a breeder rather than dealing with the rescues. We tried. Anyway, here they are a year later..


----------



## SdJessF

I am so glad I found this thread. We lost our beloved rescue golden last fall and we have been through the wringer tying to adopt another golden. Since our last time getting a dog from a golden rescue we have had a couple kids. Now no one wants to deal with us, not even consider it. We don't want a dog that is unsafe with kids (been down that road with another dog from another rescue), but surely there are SOME goldens needing homes that would be fine with kids, right?

We finally found a group that said they'll work with us and they did a home check. The volunteers told us, right in front of our children, that we were approved and we could start inquiring about the dogs they have available (not that any of them, save one very old senior, were approved for children). The next day I got a call with a list of things that we had to change about our house to get approved. Heartbreaking. We did do what they asked, but we're still waiting for the approval. I wrote an email to check how things were going and to inquire about a younger dog on their list, but got a very terse reply reiminding me that we were not approved so we should not be asking about dogs. :-(

This has been utterly heartbreaking for all of us. I have sung the praises of golden rescues for over a decade, and I'm left feeling dejected. Adopting Rocky was one of the best things we ever did. He was the furry heart of our family. 

After reading here, I gathered the names of all of the good breeders you all have recommended within about five hours of here and wrote every one of them an email telling them a little about our family and that we are looking for leads on any adults or older puppies who needs home. The very next day I heard from someone nearby who had a possibility for us. We're going to see her today. Hopefully our family will be complete again. 

I know there are good rescues out there, I know I do. It's too bad that so many families are being kept from rescuing.


----------



## Dallas Gold

SdJessF said:


> I am so glad I found this thread. We lost our beloved rescue golden last fall and we have been through the wringer tying to adopt another golden. Since our last time getting a dog from a golden rescue we have had a couple kids. Now no one wants to deal with us, not even consider it. We don't want a dog that is unsafe with kids (been down that road with another dog from another rescue), but surely there are SOME goldens needing homes that would be fine with kids, right?
> 
> We finally found a group that said they'll work with us and they did a home check. The volunteers told us, right in front of our children, that we were approved and we could start inquiring about the dogs they have available (not that any of them, save one very old senior, were approved for children). The next day I got a call with a list of things that we had to change about our house to get approved. Heartbreaking. We did do what they asked, but we're still waiting for the approval. I wrote an email to check how things were going and to inquire about a younger dog on their list, but got a very terse reply reiminding me that we were not approved so we should not be asking about dogs. :-(
> 
> This has been utterly heartbreaking for all of us. I have sung the praises of golden rescues for over a decade, and I'm left feeling dejected. Adopting Rocky was one of the best things we ever did. He was the furry heart of our family.
> 
> After reading here, I gathered the names of all of the good breeders you all have recommended within about five hours of here and wrote every one of them an email telling them a little about our family and that we are looking for leads on any adults or older puppies who needs home. The very next day I heard from someone nearby who had a possibility for us. We're going to see her today. Hopefully our family will be complete again.
> 
> I know there are good rescues out there, I know I do. It's too bad that so many families are being kept from rescuing.


Best wishes for finding a good dog for your family from the breeder. It sounds like this is the best way for you to proceed right now in this stage of your life. I hope your family will be complete with the addition of a 4 footed companion soon.


----------



## ChoppersMOM

This is exactly why so many goldies end up staying in foster care or rescues... Because they think they have the cookie cutter fomula for the perfect adoptive family and household. Unfortunately not all goldens are the same and neither are all families for that matter. What also sickens me is the price for a rescued golden. I had a rescue tell me a dog I was interested in was $600, he was 7 years old. I just spent $2700 in 6 days trying to save my 7 1/2 year olds life... the price is a little steep. And this is also why people go and buy puppies... When rescues want $800 and local breeders (not saying they are the champion bloodline pups) want $500...


----------



## SheetsSM

ChoppersMOM said:


> When rescues want $800 and local breeders (not saying they are the champion bloodline pups) want $500...


I think it's shortsighted to compare a pup from a BYB being sold for $500 to a rescue that has been brought current on its vaccinations, spayed/neutered, tested (and treated if necessary) for heartworms & tickborne diseases, microchipped and treated for whatever other ailments they came into rescue with. Rescue (when done right) is expensive & even with discounts from vet clinics I haven't met a rescue yet that's operating in the black. While I've been volunteering with rescues primarily in the midwest & south, a majority of the goldens coming in are HW+ with the average treatment being $500/dog.

I am saddened to hear that so many folks are having issues getting approved. Though I move every couple of years, I make a point to volunteer with my local GR rescue to not only share my passion for the breed but also to attempt to influence change for the good and share the policies/procedures with each of the groups to incorporate best practices. For me, I'm doing my best to be a part of the solution & not a victim of it.


----------



## ChoppersMOM

Not trying to be short sided at all... Merely stating that I think it is a lot of money to ask of people for a dog that may not live very long. I am under the impression the idea is to get these dogs rehomed and I just feel like that isn't always the case. Then you hear of people saying "if they can't affor it, then they can't afford the dog". I know people who are not well off but they make do with what they have and they take thir animals to shot clinics and to a spay clinic... And their dog is fine with them just as good as if it were a rich family. In the end it should be whether the family can provided a quality living situation not how much money. So sorry if I did not convey my feelings adequately in my first post.


----------



## Charliethree

Though there may be some rescues not 'operating' up to people's expectations - there are a LOT of rescues doing a world of good, changing lives for those who need help the most, the sick, the injured and the abused and the unwanted.


----------



## Calistar

Since I started this thread over a year ago, I would like to chime in. I don't think that anyone has said that there are not good rescue services out there. But there are certainly far too many that have restrictive arbitrary rules which in many cases make requirements on potential adoptive families that are far from agreed upon by a wide variety of people across the dog world. They are definitely sufficient in number to make the process difficult at a minimum and to unfortunately give rescue services in general a bad name. If the rescue services would unite and adopt a consistent set of requirements for potential adoptive homes that would allow rescue organizations at location A where a potential adoptive home is available for a dog at location B then more dogs could be placed. But unfortunately there are too many rescue services that place arbitrarily selected rules developed by inexperienced volunteers on potential good adoptive homes resulting in the people simply pursuing another less insulting and abusive avenue. The big loser in that case is the dog who only wants a loving home.


----------



## teq3

Rivs ~ Just finished reading thru this entire thread & want to thank you for a good chuckle when I saw your picture! Love Love Love this picture.... you should send it to the rescue that has issues with boxers. They both are cutie!


----------



## Ranger

I don't know about everyone else, but I'm getting real sick of these "rescues are sooooo meeeeeeaaaaaan" threads. Terms like "arbitrary rules" really irritates me. There are good rescues and there are bad rescues, just like there are good breeders and bad breeders. 

For what I'm sure won't be the last time, I'll re-state: lots of rules that might seem "arbitrary" are in fact put up for a reason. Anyone who has volunteered for a rescue sees the absolute hell some dogs go through and the rules are there to HELP the dogs, not screw over people applying to adopt. 

I wonder if there are as many threads about people bitching about breeders turning them down as there are about rescues...as if people sacrificing their time, energy and seeing the worse the world has to offer is doing it for some reason other than helping animals. I know I just love it when it's implied - or explicitly stated - that rescues are manned by selfish, irrational people after I've loved, cuddled, trained and bonded with a puppy for 6 weeks and then have my heart broken when I see my foster puppy go happily to her new home. 

Maybe people need to get off their high horses and actually go volunteer at a rescue for a week or two. See the garbage that the dogs have gone through and what the volunteers deal with on a daily basis before making judgements.


----------



## Calistar

No one replied or spoke in such juvenile terms about rescue organizations. Nor did they imply that all organizations were bad. So perhaps you should look at the real message rather than try to spin what was said. Many of these so called "arbitrary rules" are developed by animal loving but untrained individuals based on some personal experience that ignores the foundational reasons that would indicate that such rules are not good. They often go against what the vast majority of vets, breeder, and dog trainers agree is proper. In essence they end up denying good forever homes to dogs based on beliefs that are without merit other than an isolated personal experience.

So I would suggest that if these well intended and well founded comments bother you so much, you simply walk away from an eight page thread which you apparently decided to read so that you do not get so emotional over what others offered as well reasoned arguments.


----------



## SdJessF

I have nothing but wonderful things to say about the breeder who helped us welcome an adult dog into our home, when no rescue would. Being a long-time fan of rescues (an affection that was developed BEFORE we had children), I'm as surprised as anyone to find that it was a breeder who accepted us and our desire to rehome a needy adult.


----------



## SdJessF

Easy and my boys.


----------



## booklady

Calistar said:


> Many of these so called "arbitrary rules" are developed by animal loving but untrained individuals based on some personal experience that ignores the foundational reasons that would indicate that such rules are not good. They often go against what the vast majority of vets, breeder, and dog trainers agree is proper. In essence they end up denying good forever homes to dogs based on beliefs that are without merit other than an isolated personal experience.


There probably are rescues with "arbitrary" rules, there are also may be rescues that I personally would not consider the best; but for the ones I've known....the reasons are very valid. The rescue knows the dogs they have available and they know what those dogs need to make the placement successful. Dogs who have proven good with children get placed in families with children. Dogs who get along with cats can be placed in homes with cats. Most of the seniors can go to homes with limited yard space or exceptions made for lack of a fence.....but it depends on what the dog needs and what dogs are in rescue at the time....not what family fell in love with a sad story or a cute picture....it's about the dogs and it's not an assembly line or first come, first served. 

Buster’s Story | Golden Bond Rescue of Oregon

Roxy’s Home and Doing Well | Golden Bond Rescue of Oregon

These are two dogs who are not ready to go up for adoption yet, and no, they aren't the average; but they aren't unusual either. Buster will probably have a fee of $400 unless he's deemed special needs and then it will be less. Roxy will probably be $300. Where does anyone see huge profit in either situation? They will probably not be available to family's with small children, either. More and more, these are the dogs coming into golden rescue....wonderful, sweet dogs, but needing a very specific home when the time comes. There are, of course, dogs in rescue with no problems other than lack of a home anymore....and those are placed quite quickly, but there is also a huge pool of potential adopters and the same criteria applies.....the best home for the specific dog and it's needs.


----------

