If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
"shelly" wrote in message
arble.net... i can understand why the shelter can't take a dog away from it's new adopters just because the former owner waltzes back into the picture, but why can't there be a fail-safe for when the shelter messes up? i realize the new adopters' ownership rights need to be protected, but this seems hideously unfair to me. But the shelter wouldn't be taking the dog away from the adopters because the adopters didn't take possession of her yet. They may have paid the fee and been told to wait until the dog is vetted before picking her up but if they had possession of her then the former owner wouldn't have been playing with her at the shelter. It was a simple matter of phoning the adopter and telling them what happened then offering their money back. Sounds like this may be more a case of the shelter not wanting to give a refund or have a refund showing on their books *or* someone at the shelter really wanted that dog so he/she gets preference over the former owner. No shelter, anywhere, can tell me their hands are tied if they are still in physical possession of the dog. That's a crock. all i can say is, microchip your pets!!! That helps but certainly isn't fullproof. Alot of shelters have scanners but don't use them. -- Tara |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
"shelly" wrote in message
arble.net... i can understand why the shelter can't take a dog away from it's new adopters just because the former owner waltzes back into the picture, but why can't there be a fail-safe for when the shelter messes up? i realize the new adopters' ownership rights need to be protected, but this seems hideously unfair to me. But the shelter wouldn't be taking the dog away from the adopters because the adopters didn't take possession of her yet. They may have paid the fee and been told to wait until the dog is vetted before picking her up but if they had possession of her then the former owner wouldn't have been playing with her at the shelter. It was a simple matter of phoning the adopter and telling them what happened then offering their money back. Sounds like this may be more a case of the shelter not wanting to give a refund or have a refund showing on their books *or* someone at the shelter really wanted that dog so he/she gets preference over the former owner. No shelter, anywhere, can tell me their hands are tied if they are still in physical possession of the dog. That's a crock. all i can say is, microchip your pets!!! That helps but certainly isn't fullproof. Alot of shelters have scanners but don't use them. -- Tara |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
"shelly" wrote in message
arble.net... i can understand why the shelter can't take a dog away from it's new adopters just because the former owner waltzes back into the picture, but why can't there be a fail-safe for when the shelter messes up? i realize the new adopters' ownership rights need to be protected, but this seems hideously unfair to me. But the shelter wouldn't be taking the dog away from the adopters because the adopters didn't take possession of her yet. They may have paid the fee and been told to wait until the dog is vetted before picking her up but if they had possession of her then the former owner wouldn't have been playing with her at the shelter. It was a simple matter of phoning the adopter and telling them what happened then offering their money back. Sounds like this may be more a case of the shelter not wanting to give a refund or have a refund showing on their books *or* someone at the shelter really wanted that dog so he/she gets preference over the former owner. No shelter, anywhere, can tell me their hands are tied if they are still in physical possession of the dog. That's a crock. all i can say is, microchip your pets!!! That helps but certainly isn't fullproof. Alot of shelters have scanners but don't use them. -- Tara |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Tee wrote: That helps but certainly isn't fullproof. Alot of shelters have scanners but don't use them. -- Tara And alot of microchips move. And if one is as close to Mexico as I am then I dog could go south of the border and never be found again. And stranger things have occurred. I don't see microchipping as full proof or even that grand. Too many podunk towns with shelters in Texas that wouldn't even have a clue how to locate a microchip, let alone what to do with the number if the did. And I fairly serious about the above. Unless your dog is lost in Austin, Houston, Dallas/Fort Worth, San Antonio and possibly Corpus Christy I wouldn't expect the itty bitty towns to have a clue that microchips even exist. Sad but true. Gwen |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Tee wrote: That helps but certainly isn't fullproof. Alot of shelters have scanners but don't use them. -- Tara And alot of microchips move. And if one is as close to Mexico as I am then I dog could go south of the border and never be found again. And stranger things have occurred. I don't see microchipping as full proof or even that grand. Too many podunk towns with shelters in Texas that wouldn't even have a clue how to locate a microchip, let alone what to do with the number if the did. And I fairly serious about the above. Unless your dog is lost in Austin, Houston, Dallas/Fort Worth, San Antonio and possibly Corpus Christy I wouldn't expect the itty bitty towns to have a clue that microchips even exist. Sad but true. Gwen |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Tee wrote: That helps but certainly isn't fullproof. Alot of shelters have scanners but don't use them. -- Tara And alot of microchips move. And if one is as close to Mexico as I am then I dog could go south of the border and never be found again. And stranger things have occurred. I don't see microchipping as full proof or even that grand. Too many podunk towns with shelters in Texas that wouldn't even have a clue how to locate a microchip, let alone what to do with the number if the did. And I fairly serious about the above. Unless your dog is lost in Austin, Houston, Dallas/Fort Worth, San Antonio and possibly Corpus Christy I wouldn't expect the itty bitty towns to have a clue that microchips even exist. Sad but true. Gwen |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
"shelly" wrote in message good! considering the good arguments against keeping collars on unattended dogs, Perhaps this is a stupid question, but why are you not suppose to keep a collar on unattended dogs? David |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
"shelly" wrote in message good! considering the good arguments against keeping collars on unattended dogs, Perhaps this is a stupid question, but why are you not suppose to keep a collar on unattended dogs? David |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
"shelly" wrote in message good! considering the good arguments against keeping collars on unattended dogs, Perhaps this is a stupid question, but why are you not suppose to keep a collar on unattended dogs? David |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 20 Jan 2004, Tee wrote:
They may have paid the fee and been told to wait until the dog is vetted before picking her up but if they had possession of her then the former owner wouldn't have been playing with her at the shelter. true. i hadn't thought about that, but you're right. Sounds like this may be more a case of the shelter not wanting to give a refund or have a refund showing on their books which would be a ludicrous excuse IMO. *or* someone at the shelter really wanted that dog so he/she gets preference over the former owner. which would be *very* unethical IMO, but it sounds like the most logical explanation to me. it just seems to me that we're missing some important pieces of the puzzle. even in a large shelter, i have trouble buying that an owner would miss seeing their dog on multiple occasions. if the owner is telling the truth, then the dog had to have been kept away from public view. No shelter, anywhere, can tell me their hands are tied if they are still in physical possession of the dog. That's a crock. it sure sounds like one to me. That helps but certainly isn't fullproof. Alot of shelters have scanners but don't use them. i realize that, but in a case like this, they'd have a *hell* of a time rationalizing why a chipped pet was placed with a new owner instead of being returned to it's original owner. -- shelly (perfectly foul wench) and elliott and harriet http://home.bluemarble.net/~scouvrette |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
I need to VENT please (found dog with heartworm - advice needed) | GAH | Dog health | 14 | December 5th 06 04:35 PM |
Atlanta area: Dog possibly in need of a home (found). | GAH | Dog health | 5 | March 5th 04 05:27 PM |
Lost and Found Circa 1887 | EGD | Dog breeds | 0 | November 5th 03 10:15 PM |
Our Homeopathic Vet lost his house in the wildfires in San Diego County. Can h | Roger C. Covalt | Dog health | 0 | October 31st 03 01:09 AM |
Our Homeopathic Vet lost his house in the wildfires in San Diego County. Can h | Roger C. Covalt | Dog health | 0 | October 31st 03 01:09 AM |