RE: Petfinder, etc

[heinz57_79]

I was just looking at PetFinder.com, after looking at the thread that mentioned it, and there was something that bothered me and I just have to vent about.

Locally, there were at least half a dozen dogs marked URGENT because the familly is moving into a place where there are breed restrictions, or they just don't allow pets at all. "We love our dog so much and have to find him a good home" blah blah blah. My point is, if you love your dog so much you DON'T MOVE INTO A PLACE WHERE YOU CAN'T TAKE HIM!! My animals are my babies, they're just like children. If you had a baby, and wanted to move into a stuffy co-op that didn't allow children, would you get rid of your child? Maybe it's just me, but I just don't get it. My furkid count is up to 10, and I couldn't even fathom moving somewhere where I couldn't take each and every one with me. I guess I just feel that some people are so hypocritical sometimes. They love their dog SOOOOOOO much, but can't be bothered to put in a little more effort to find some place to live where they can take them.

Sorry for the venting, but it's just something that has always bugged me. :)

[Rio and Me]

you are so right heinz, there may not be many but there are definatly some places that allow pets, it just means looking harder/maybe longer.
Also do any of these people have "friends" that could take a dog/cat etc family etc.
I would NEVER give up rio but if for some reason i had no choice (cant think of any) i have several people who would take her.

There are more choices then a shelter!!
Ky

[catnapper]

I know that Nicki is my baby and nothing wold keep her from me. If we had to move and the house we were looking at didn't allow a big dog like her, then we'd continue our search.

But I have the feeling that more and more places are making these restrctions... and its not just apartments or townhome communities. I've heard of towns making restrictions like that. Ok, so don't move to that town. but what if its 4 or 5 towns next to each toher... where are you to go? That could eat up a 20 mile radius of dog restrcitions! This is the movement thats recently begun. They say that they are "safer" communities.

I heard of it on the news Sunday morning and was so mad! I mean, Anybody could shove their hand down Nicki's mouth and get no reaction from her. I've actually had her really annoyed to the point of serious growling and stuck my face in her face (dumb move on my part, but I've done it many times for one reason or another.) As soon as I did that, she relaxed... its all in the owner, not the pet.

[anna_66]

I totally feel the same way.
The main reason we moved where we live now was for the dogs. And the reason we bought our Durango...again the dogs:)
I can't imagine making such choices that would seperate me from my furkids.

[minkyboodle]

Well, I'm going to think the most positive thing about these people...of course I know this isn't the case for some people but still it could be the case in a few.

I LOOOOVE my furkids. They are my babies and I care for them alot. But then again...if, well , lets say for some reason an emergency came up and for some reason I couldn't stay in the place I currently live and would have to move and the only choice would be to a place that doesn't allow pets...and I have to move like right away without any choice...I dunno...I would have to let them go probably...but then again I have enough friends that would temporarily care for my animals if needed too...so i guess i just dunno...

and most people say they love their animals but they don't love them really as much as some of us do.

[Cincy'sMom]

I don't always understand how someone could give up their pets, but sometimes we have to be a little understanding...at least they are doing what they can to find their dogs the best home possible instead of just leaving them alone in the house or just turn them loose. As hard as it is for me to believe, sometimes circumstances do change and it is a hard decision to leave a pet behind.

That being said, I can't image ever giving up any of my babies for any reason. One reason we chose this house was becuase of the fenced yard...and we knew we watned a dog. Ralph traded in his Mustang for a mini-van when we got #3...a big sacrifice for a guy :D

I feel bad for our Spot, that his family left him behind when he had to move, but their loss was our gain!!!

[bluekat]

I know what you mean...its just sad to think that people couldn't just move to a different place because of their dog. It doesn't really seem to me that they love their pet THAT much.:(
I would never give Blueberry away for anything.

[QueenScoopalot]

We bought the house for the dogs lol! :) It took a bit of searching for an obviously pet friendly neighborhood, and we lucked out finding one. We were renters for a number of years before, and it got harder to find apts. that rented to pet owners. The last place we rented was decent when we moved in (the landlord was a happy-go-lucky drunk) who said he didn't care how many pets we had. He said "we could grow pot in the gutters, keep chickens in the kitchen". The place turned into a ghetto as the years passed, and we got out of there before the place was demolished. As an ode to Rick...I have chickens in the kitchen, but not real ones. But it is really tough these days when people don't respect either others property, or the pets that many times they bring into the world. Disposable society....sad.:(

[teenster3]

Hello,
I have a comment on this subject as well. You're definitely not alone feeling "upset" by people getting rid of their dogs / pets. I posted a message on Petfinder once about this topic and received a lot of angry responses. I just stated that: "I didn't understand how people can up and get rid of their beloved pets".......I must have hit a soft spot. (I had people that if I had met them, would probably want to rip my face off.) I had people tell me that: who the h*** am I to say what's good for a person to do, that I obviously had not been in a situation like their's before, etc. Well, fortunately I haven't and I'm grateful for that! If I had to give my dogs up......geez, I don't know what I would do......probably sit and cry. I'm very attached to them. I don't have children yet so, they're like my babies. I had 1 woman tell me, it's no different than giving up a child. What does that mean?! I agree there may be circumstances which are unavoidable but, it seems that this happens so often. Why is it that we live in a society that is so evil? I mean seriously, I was asking my husband this question tonight. I'm probably going to get bashed for this but, I'd like people to tell me, why animals (poor innocent animals) are abused on a daily basis? Why there is abuse (period) to children, women, men ( in some cases)? Why is this such a crazy world we live in? This may not be the area to write in but, you got me thinking on this subject.....I apologize if I upset anyone. I'm also just venting and wondering if other people feel this way???
Tina:confused:

[CathyBogart]

There is no situation that could make me give up Chubby. Ever. I've been in a sutiation where I had to give up some of my rats, and I made sure they went to the best possible place. (And in fact I got a happy update today)

The main reason I have not moved out of my parents' house is that there are almost no apartments around here where I could bring Chubby. I'll stay here for as long as it takes.

If it were just one or two peopleI might me more understanding, but it happens SO OFTEN. It's sad that people aren't willing to give that little extra bit of effort to take their pets with them.

[honor_fl]

Personally, I think its all about planning responsibly.

In my own case, I didn't dream about getting a dog until I owned my own home with a fenced yard. From the time I graduated college until now, I shared my life with cats, because I couldn't stand the thought of living without a pet. I had grown up with dogs, but I knew there was no way I could take care of a dog in an apartment and commute to work.

When I finally bought a place, it was a townhouse, with a small fenced courtyard. Cats again, because I was commuting 65 miles a day, and no way could I take care of a dog in the proper way.

And now finally, MANY years later, I have a house with a fenced yard that's two miles from where I work. I don't think we were there more than two weeks before we had our first dog. (The cats are still learning to cope :rolleyes: ) I go home every day to let the dogs out at lunch. The yard is adequate, and we live next to a park. The neighborhood is extremely dog friendly, and this was one of the things I looked for when I was looking for a new house.

Unfortunately, people do things without thinking it through.

[catnapper]

LOL honor_fl, what a great story! Hubby and I were talking about this the other day. He has a great job interview tomorrow (fingers crossed) and the job will be about an hour's drive. Since I work from home and could do my job anywhere, we are considering moving if he gets the job to be closer to work, but also because its further out in the country where we could buy a nice piece of land for Nicki to run. I wasn't thinking of the extra land for me. As far as I'm concerened, I don't need a yard, just pave it over and paint it green (kidding!) but I want a huge yard so Nicki can wander and play.

We all make life choices, and having a pet is a major one that shouldn't be made lightly. Imagine the public's reaction if we started "no kids" communities and families that moved into them took their pets, but posted their kids on kidfinder.com!!! "This sweet 6 year old loves baseball and is an A student. He has a small fear of the dark." LOL.... it would never happen, but why is it happening so carelessly and thoughtlessly every day with pets?

[honor_fl]

LOL

Its happened here (to a small extent) in florida, where they have adult only communities, and the grandchildren have come either for an extended visit or to stay permanently. What a hullaballoo because children are present. You'd think they were the spawn of satan.

Good luck for hubby's job interview tomorrow!

[CathyBogart]

Originally posted by honor_fl
LOL

Its happened here (to a small extent) in florida, where they have adult only communities, and the grandchildren have come either for an extended visit or to stay permanently. What a hullaballoo because children are present. You'd think they were the spawn of satan.

Good luck for hubby's job interview tomorrow!

Hey now - If I could find an adults-only community, you can bet 'd be there in a heartbeat!! :-P They ARE the spawn of satan to a degree. :)

[heinz57_79]

Wow... I must've hit a soft spot! LoL

About the only thing that could ever make me give up my babies is if there was some sort of medical condition which absolutely, under no circumstances allowed me to have my animals. But even then, I'd probably try every drug known to man before finally giving up. :) There are more and more places that are putting up breed restrictions. Which, to me, is just ignorance. At work, at least a handful of people who knew I got Arthur (a rotti pup) gave me the "Gasp! Aren't they violenT?!" response. And I know it's because of him that the place we're in now is probably going to be the last place we'll ever rent. We're already looking into a bigger place to BUY so we have enough room for the monster he's gonna grow into, plus the other 2 dogs and 7 cats. (The kittens are doing great, btw. I'll get more pics soon!)

Having pets is a bigger responsibility than most people realise. It's not just a matter of walks, feeding and cleaning the litter box. You have to think long term. To me, there's nothing more heartbreaking than going into a shelter and seeing a 10, 12, 15 year old dog sitting there because the family moved and didn't take her with them.

Too many humans just leave me scratching my head in wonder.

[leslie flenner]

that sometimes financial and other constraints lead pet owners to have to find other homes for their pets- BUT what I hate is that they don't SAY this is the case. In other words, the ad COULD and SHOULD say, "We are miserable at being put in this situation by our landlord who is evicting us with only 30 days to find another home". Or anything like that. Cuz I hate those ads too about how much they Love so and so, so please take him/her!
Up here in the Boston area, most ads (cuz I've been looking) say "no pets". It makes me crazy. It's too judgemental. Oh!! I really hate an owner who says, "Well, if I let one tenant have a cat, I'll have to let others have big dogs." NO, that is not true! An owner can specify what animals are ok and how many!! Such jerks!!
And then I explain, my cats don't spray. No, is the answer. So I lie. My cats are declawed. No, is the answer. So what the friggin f** * is the problem? Why "NO"? what are they worried about? Seems like a control issue to me. They aren't even THINKING about the whys of why they have this "no pets" rule!!!!!!!! Ok, I'm done venting!!!!!!!

[carole]

I look at it like this, there are people who like animals, and people who love animals, like the members on PT, and they are the ones who would never ever shift to somewhere that could not have their pets.

[guster girl]

This was posted not too long ago on another forum I visit.

AUBURN, Wash. - Soon, any dog over 30 pounds could be classified as "potentially dangerous" in the city of Auburn under a proposed ordinance.
The ordinance is known as "Fritz's Law." Fritz, a poodle-terrier, was attacked and killed by a pit bull on Jan. 10. The pit bull had previously attacked other dogs, and Auburn residents were not happy with King County Animal Control's lenient treatment the pit bull and its owner.
The city council wants to reclassify bigger dogs as "potentially dangerous," and dogs with a history of biting or killing people or other animals as "dangerous."
"If you're a responsible owner this will not affect you at all," said Auburn Councilman Gene Cerino. "The only people that this will affect are people who are not responsible in their ownership."
Pet owners crammed Auburn's city council meeting Monday night, saying parts of the proposal don't make sense, especially the weight clause.
"To say a dog is dangerous because of its size is completely ridiculous. My dogs lay around the house 85 percent of the time. The only time they get excited is when the food bowl is being brought out or the leases," said dog owner George Gray.
Owners of dogs classified as dangerous would have to follow some pretty strict rules, including a yearly fee
HERE IS A LINK TO THE CITY OF AUBURN WEBSITE (YOU WILL NEED A AC0RBAT READER TO VIEW THIS)

http://weblink.ci.auburn.wa.us/councilpacket/index1.htm

CLICK ON
CURRENT COUNCIL PACKET ON THE LEFT SIDE THEN SCROLL DOWN TO WHERE IT SAYS

VIII. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS

Ordinance No. 5829* (Cerino/Heid)
O3.4.2.1.2
An Ordinance of the City of Auburn, Washington, creating a new Chapter 6.35 of the Auburn City Code related to dangerous dogs

I was unable to read the link myself because I wasn't at a decent computer, but, I'll probably read it tomorrow from home. Anyway, just kinda goes along with the restrictions placed on people with pets. I'd live in a shack with my dog before I'd live in a mansion without him.

[heinz57_79]

ANy dog over 30 lbs is dangerous??? Wait... let me tell Charlie, cuz I don't think he knows. And I mean, Corgis are pretty violent anyway. I mean, just look at his picture! I see "killer" written all over it. (can you HEAR my sarcasm??? ugh... ) :rolleyes: I dunno, I've seen some Yorkies who are a hell of a lot more dangerous that some rotties I've encountered. WHY are people SO stupid??? Ignorance.... pure ignorance!

[guster girl]

Originally posted by heinz57_79
ANy dog over 30 lbs is dangerous???


Well, they're not labelled "dangerous" until they've harmed someone. I think, honestly, that they should nix the "potentially dangerous" part of that, for the simple fact that nothing is restricted on "potentially dangerous" dogs, it doesn't seem like you'll have to do anything differently with your "potentially dangerous" dog until he hurts another animal or another person. So, I don't know why that label is even necessary. But, I'm in complete agreeance with the restrictions on dangerous dogs. But, I think the weight thing is pretty goofy. I'd like to see ANY dog that has proven to be dangerous to people or animals, leashed at all times, and, even muzzled. I mean, if you have a chihuahua that bites every dog it sees or every kid that approaches it, it shouldn't be running around freely or unmuzzled. Same as if your big dog is agressive. Honestly, I think they DO need to crack down everywhere on that kind of thing. But, they also need to crack down on humans abusing animals, maybe they shouldn't be allowed off leash, either. :)

[GoldenRetrLuver]

Originally posted by guster girl
AUBURN, Wash. - Soon, any dog over 30 pounds could be classified as "potentially dangerous" in the city of Auburn under a proposed ordinance.


So all this time I've been living with 'potentially dangerous' dogs?! :eek:

Ay. Think people, think! :rolleyes:

[guster girl]

I agree the weight thing is silly, but, I think the whole point is they're just trying to be a little more PC and not making it breed specific. But, I think they're missing the mark, cuz they're just stereotyping a larger group, now. I think their intentions were good, but, like I've said before, they should drop the "potentially dangerous" label altogether, and, just make restrictions on dogs that ARE dangerous. If they have to make a label like that, they should just put it on all dogs. I mean, technically, there aren't many animals (humans, dogs, cats, rodents, reptiles, etc) that don't have the capability of being dangerous. I dunno.... I'm glad I'm not in politics, sheesh. :)

[DogLover9501]

I am also living with a "potentially dangerous" dog :eek: :p