Nov
Some Dog Owners Really, Really Suck – What Can We Do About it?
Don’t be fooled folks, this isn’t just an isolated case from the other side of the world. This sort of thing happens regularly in the UK too. Ask anyone who works in animal rescue, ask dog wardens – sadly there are some people who do not deserve the privilege of canine companionship:
In Spokane Valley, one dog owner, Ruth Stallings, wasn’t pleased to hear her lost dog was found. In fact, when Bosque Animal Rescue Kennels identified the dog that park rangers found and turned in as belonging to her after scanning for a microchip, she told them that she didn’t want the dog back, just send it to the pound.
“They tracked the owner down to Spokane,” said Dr. Bill Trotter, a physician who volunteers with the shelter, Bosque Animal Rescue Kennels, in Clifton, Texas. “And they called her, and she said she didn’t want to have anything to do with the dog. ‘Send him to the pound,’ is what she said.”
Bruno, a shepherd mix, supposedly ran away when Stallings was camping at Lake Whitney, Texas. She said she looked for him but had to leave.
“It irritated the hell out of me — I wanted to make sure the people in Spokane knew about this,” Trotter said. “Here we run this little kennel, and it’s full all the time. Then this woman doesn’t want her dog back.”
The shelter Trotter refers to is set up for 15 dogs and there are currently 50 living there. And this uncaring woman thoughtlessly added to the problem.
Stallings confirmed last week that she doesn’t want Bruno back. “He ran away from us five times, and we figured he didn’t want to be with us. First chance he got, he’d take off.”
“When we adopted him, we overlooked some things,” said Stallings, who’s had other dogs. “He was chewing up clothing and stuff, and we thought it was the puppy stage. But it never got any better.”
“People abandon dogs here a lot,” said Evan Moore, editor and publisher of the weekly Bosque County News. “We are a rural area, and we are close to Dallas-Fort Worth. People drive down here and dump their dogs off.”
Whilst we universally accept that abuse and neglect of dogs is rightly an offence which can be prosecuted, abandonment is not. In fact 100,000 abandoned dogs in UK rescue shelters tells its own story. Sadly there are some people who simply don’t have the moral fibre to ever be suitable, responsible dog owners. It’s my view that we have a problem that needs to be addressed. Whilst anyone is allowed to get any dog and abandon it as and when it suits them, we can expect to see our shelters at breaking point forever more. This is not a trend that will simply ‘right itself’. Dogs being indiscriminately bred, irresponsibly supplied and abandoned at the drop of a hat is all perfectly legal and is a trend that will continue to rise if left unchecked.
No this doesn’t just happen in the USA sadly. I have two beautiful dogs here, both abandoned both chipped and when owners were contacted they said they were fed up with them and didn’t want them back one even tried to deny ownership.
Dog Ownership Suitability Test is the way forward .
>>> What can we do about it?
Absolutely nothing. You can’t legislate to keep people from being jerks. Nor should you (as a rescuer) try because you’ll use lots and lots of energy trying to punish jerks that could be, being used to attract,support and keep great owners.
To quote someone, somewhere; Building an animal shelter and then getting mad at the people dropping off pets is like building a drug support clinic and getting mad at people for being addicts.
While “a pet is a lifetime responsibility” sounds great in theory, but it hides a much more judgmental and completely unhelpful attitude; “a responsible owner would never give up their pet, therefore everyone who gives up their pet is irresponsible”.
So tell me; who IS allowed to surrender? Someone who’s sick? Someone who’s died? Someone who’s lost their job? Or should these people be considered ‘irresponsible’ too.
What about someone who doesn’t like their pet? Should everyone who’s ever made the wrong decision in pet ownership stick at it for life? Even though both them and the pet will be miserable?
I’m sorry, our job in rescue is to support animals and people through the ups and downs. Our job is education, support, taking in the animals that need us and adopting them to new families and not resorting to killing them. All of it.
If you’re not interested in helping people and would rather just sit in judgment of those ‘irresponsible owners’ who dare to use your service, fine.
But don’t call yourself a ‘shelter’.
Shel wrote “I’m sorry, our job in rescue is to support animals and people through the ups and downs. Our job is education, support, taking in the animals that need us and adopting them to new families and not resorting to killing them. All of it.”
Rescues don’t want to kill animals. Those that work in rescue want to help animals the last thing they want to do is resort to killing them but what else can they do when there are more dogs than good homes and rescue spaces available. Please enlighten us to the solution?
shel
It’s just my opinion but your rationale seems a little screwed to me.
If I can take one example:
“To quote someone, somewhere; Building an animal shelter and then getting mad at the people dropping off pets is like building a drug support clinic and getting mad at people for being addicts.”
If you turn that round, by your logic if you work in a drug support clinic you must approve of drug addiction? or you must approve of the obnoxious pensioner who demands (not asks) that you take his old dog and when you ask some reasonable questions you get the aggressive response back that he’s had the dog since a puppy, it’s now seventeen and he doesn’t want it as he’s just had fitted carpets throughout the house and doesn’t want dog hairs everywhere and no, he doesn’t care that you will almost certainly not be able to re-home the dog?
According to you I’m not allowed to privately have negative feelings about people who treat animals like a tin of beans or a disposable cigarette lighter, in other words they are disposable and not worth a moments thought?
I will happily help people who have genuine reasons for needing help in re-homing their pets through circumstances beyond their control.
I have little time for the people who just could not care less for their animals.
By the way, I’m not in this line of work to re-home other peoples animals. But I do it anyway because the animals need us.
Dave; it’s not about your feelings at all. That’s the point. It’s about the pets.
The title of this post was:
Some Dog Owners Really, Really Suck – What Can We Do About it? … because an owner gave up her pet.
Who are we to say who ‘sucks’. Who gets to surrender their pets and who doesn’t? Who has an excuse ‘worthy’ in our personal opinion? All we should care about is that the pet needs our help because they’re not wanted.
Drug clinics don’t approve of addiction, but they realise punishment and blame doesn’t help the victim. We can make drugs illegal and throw addicts in jail, but they’re still victims. So these groups look beyond punishment and offer support and services to people BEFORE they get addicted or after to help them change their behaviour.
Meanwhile we rescues are stuck in stick-not-carrot loop trying to punish with new laws, more fines and greater powers for rescues to seize even more pets.
Today in the UK!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/3381311/Absurd-new-guidelines-advise-pet-owners-against-allowing-dogs-to-beg-at-the-table.html
And you know what? We can bring in laws for whatever we like, but some people will still be jerks. There’s no law you can make, that will stop some people ‘sucking’.
But now we have a whole lot of fines for lost and roaming pets, un-microchipped pets, un-desexed pets. And pets are in danger of being killed because their owners can’t afford to pay the fines. Suddenly we’re killing the pets of the disadvantaged – when they have perfectly good homes!
How is that ‘helping pets’?
And by becoming ‘the pet police’ we’ve cemented the divide between ourselves and the public. As people don’t get their next pet from the people who fined them, embarrassed them or seized and killed their last pet (or that of a friend or neighbour) we move even further away from being the number 1 source of pets for pet-lovers.
Our efforts should be in strengthening our relationship with our public, improving resources for pet owners and helping people be better pet-people.
Not thinking up new laws to punish jerks.
shel
While I don’t doubt your sincerity, I do feel that your attitude and ideas are one of the problems we have with todays society. We must not tell people that they are wrong or apply sanctions to anyone.
This type of thinking is why we have at least two generations who believe that whatever they want they can have now and what they don’t want they can just discard because it’s easy to get a replacement or something different.
I see people regularly who just aren’t used to being told no! or having boundaries placed on their behaviour.
I think I’ve been in this work for long enough to understand that a lot of people need advice and assistance rather than the big stick. But, I also have absolutely no doubt that there are an awful lot of people who really do need to be told in no uncertain terms what is unacceptable.
In actual fact I am the ‘Animal Police’ in my area! with statutory duties and powers, that does not stop me helping, advising and assisting where I can and where it is appropriate.
I would far rather have a few words of advice than take enforcement action (there’s far too much paperwork in it these days)
How is it helping pets? well it certainly isn’t helping when the same people appear time and again with welfare, breeding or control issues issues and the only ones to suffer are the animals themselves because no-one has taken the owner to task in the past.
If that means that they (and their friends/neighbours)don’t come to my kennels looking for a new pet, I can live with that. I think the animals can too.