[pupresq]

Quote: Now will rescue have the perspective to step back and evaluate how they expend their resources? That pathetic case - so cute but so many health issues, so injured - how many resources is that going to take from the healthy, uninjured animal? Indeed, how many healthy animals could be helped in place of the one that demands so much?

This is definitely something rescues deal with every day and it's a weird and complicated process. Sometimes people try to boil it down to basic arithmetic but it goes way beyond X number of dollars for Y number of lives saved. And the money spent on hard luck cases often doesn't always exist (and so therefore can't get taken away) from healthier dogs. Often the dogs for which you get the donations are the ones that are most pathetic. Ironically, the most injured dog at a shelter may have a better chance at life than any one of the perfectly healthy but common other dogs because the hard luck dog is the one that will appeal to people. Sometimes it makes sense to me, sometimes it doesn't, but who am I to tell people which dogs are worth helping and which are not?

And money is just one factor - even more important IMO is foster space. I could rescue two perfectly healthy Shepherd mixes tomorrow and still have them, unplaced, a year from now. So even though I love Shepherd mixes, I'm constantly turning them away because of all the other dogs I won't be able to help if I take them.

But in other cases, yes, the money you spend treating heartworms or parvo is money you don't have for preventative and vaccines for the shelter that might have prevented those situations in the first place. On the other hand, part of your creedo may be doing whatever is necessary for the dogs in your care (it is mine). Another group may feel like treating those things is wrong because it takes the money from other things. There's really no right answer to that one and it's all a balancing act.

Sometimes people make comments that imply that it's my (or rescue's) "job" or obligation to do things in some other way. I'm open to suggestions, I just don't like being told that we "should" euthanize a dog or not help a dog we want to help because that money could be spent in some other way. There's ALWAYS going to be another way to spend the money. You do the best you can. There is no way for me to save them all and I can only do what I can do. I have a soft spot for seniors. Other people are suckers for a particular coat or color. If purebred rescues want to pull purebred rescues with issues over mixes without them, that's their prerogative. No rescuer is obligated to do more than they are doing. No rescuer is obligated at all - except for the obligations we put on ourselves (but man, those are doozies! ) We are not the ones who put the dogs there, we are only doing our best to help.

Quote:Rescues face rotten decisions daily. Who to take, who to turn away, what parameters to use for adopters.

You got that right.