Hello,

For those who run breed-specific rescues or have adopted from rescues, I was wondering if rescues tend to set guidelines insofar as what a prospect would feed the rescue. I have been doing some research on potentially adopting a new animal and noticed there is a premise inspection and interview process. In conversation with some folks who have adopted from rescues before, they indicated to me that they know of applicants who were interviewed but declined the adoption because they were raw feeders.

Is this common practice (setting up care guidelines as an indicator of applicant suitability) with rescues? I have absolutely zero experience with rescues or adoptions so everything is a brand new learning experience.

Thanks!

I volunteer/foster for an all-breed rescue and we are MUCH more concerned with the fact that the owners will KEEP the dog forever than what they will be fed. We get our dogs from kill shelters, and the main concern is that the dog finds 'its forever home'. We don't talk about food at all, we just give them a bag of science diet *grr I know: but it's free* I'm sure there are rescues that care and those that don't. Most of the staff feeds raw/high quality kibble and would encourage a raw diet, but it's not discussed with adopters unless they specifically ask.

People fear things they don't understand, many people think (I did before I did the research) raw feeding is giving a dog a chicken bone daily for a dog's meal.

 Quote: Siaty Mantak

In conversation with some folks who have adopted from rescues before, they indicated to me that they know of applicants who were interviewed but declined the adoption because they were raw feeders.

What did those folks (the ones you were speaking to who have adopted from rescues before) feed?

Hi Alyssa,

The folks I knew fed kibble. The ones that they were talking about fed raw. What happened was on the home inspection, the representative from the rescue looked around the place (I suppose the were inspecting for the ordinary cleanliness, safety, condition of existing pets, etc.) and started to go through a laundry list of questions. The question about what they fed their pets came up and they said raw which is supposedly when the rescue representative gave a "funny look."

If I were to adopt and go through a similar screening process, which I know I will since the breed I am looking to rescue is rare and already stated the inspection and interview as part of the process, I could be in trouble on a few fronts: 1) I feed raw, 2) I do not really vaccinate, and 3) I have unpopular collars (i.e., e-collar and prong), which I suppose the last two points I can just outright lie and hide.

I suppose it really is not a big deal, but curious how such inspections and interviews are assessed on the feeding level.

I was going to rescue a pretty little female siberian husky.

They turned me down because my fence was too low even though I was clear that the dogs would not be outside unsupervised, and also because Nico was unspayed and did not get any shots at all including her rabies. I provided them with a doctors note explaining and excusing her from both things but it didn't matter.

That had nothing to do with feeding, but I found both to be stupid reasons to turn someone down.

 Quote: siaty mantak

The folks I knew fed kibble.

I ask, because I have known a quite a few folks to bend the truth a bit when it comes to raw feeding.
I've had otherwise great, well-meaning folks say that feeding raw will prevent you from being able to do all sorts of things, like adopt dogs, board dogs, that a veterinarian would refuse to treat your dog, that you could lose your pet health insurance.

When the claims were looked into, they were completely false, and completely unfounded.

In short, some kibble folks, for whatever reason, take some "creative liberty" when it comes to raw feeding.

I don't remember it coming up explicitly with Luc, though we did talk about feeding. At the time I was a kibble feeder (what could be better than Hill's Prescription Diet), but it wasn't like the foster home was feeding the best kibble either....one of those sketchy Pet Valu kinds if I recall.

I also didn't go through normal screening procedures adopting Luc - I called the foster home, chatted for about an hour, in giving references mentioned my previous involvement fostering/trapping and running the cat rescue, and fostering for a rabbit rescue and guinea pig rescue, and I knew the person who was in charge of the rescue that Luc's foster home was with, and just mentioned that she would know who I was, so when they confirmed that with the head, I was basically automatically approved. So Luc's adoption may not be the best example.

When I ran the rescue (cat), it was a concern for me. I wouldn't have been okay with adopting out a cat that was going to be fed Friskies or whatever. I usually asked what they planned to feed, stressed quality (I know, I know, Hill's....I was used to getting the specific foods for all my cat's medical conditions).

I think it will depend on the rescue and the foster home.

When I adopted Neb, I fed raw/sometimes grain-free kibble, and the rescue thought that was great. So it depends. Of course, I also had to sign a neuter contract

Are you committed to going the rescue route (I'm assuming you want foster home feedback re: behaviour around other dogs and cats?) I really like Toronto Animal Services - I would avoid the Humane Society like the PLAGUE (pm if you want), but that's another option, but it's more of a risk in terms of behaviour. I was able to have Luc and Teagan 'meet' (through a fence), but they had not tested her with cats.

eta: and when I adopted Luc, I rented (still do) and didn't have a yard. Same with Teagan.

I think it just depends on the place you are adopting from. The feed shouldn't really matter in adopting. My brother helps out where we got our first dog so we didn't get a lot of questions but he said that they get food dontated and just mix it all together and feed the dogs. Where we got our second dog they didn't even ask about food.

To my understanding the adoption facility is just happy to have food to give the dogs so they can feed them which makes sense.

The raw thing if it's a big concern than I would go elsewhere. As long as you are caring for the dog and can make sure its feed, fresh water, excersise, good home environment and gets along with the other animals they shouldn't have many problems.

Good luck

the application i filled out for Tucker didn't even have a feeding question. Nor did they do a home visit. They did ask some property questions and phoned my landlord to make sure it was ok for me to have a dog. But no one came out to see my place.
I think resuce's should be more concerned with who's rescuing than what they are planning on feeding.
Now, don't all jump on me at once, but I don't think whats fed should be a humungous concern at all. The focus should be on the fact that the dog is going to a loving, stable home environment and will be safe and happy.
If someone can't afford to feed a high quality kibble but can give the dog a stable home, does that mean they shouldn't own a dog?????
Especially in these times. I'll bet you there are quite a few dogs that have had their kibble changed to a lower priced one, but it doesn't mean the owner is irresponsible or un-caring. I know that if times get tough that would be one area that I would have to consider cutting costs, as well as my own food.

 Quote: Wendy Lefebvre

the application i filled out for Tucker didn't even have a feeding question. Nor did they do a home visit.

Ditto.

I do know some rescues with rule about fences and about other unvaccinated animals in the home.