Well I don't like that idea

[paddy555]

So you definitely wouldn’t apply? Ever? Even just as a back up? So if you were desperate for a cockerpoo you wouldn’t even fill a form in saying that’s what you wanted?
On that basis you couldn’t contact a breeder either, if you didn’t know at all what you were after?

I wouldn't apply. Before I got my current dog I went to a local rescue. This was their policy. Walked away.

If I look at animals one jumps out at me. I might go looking for say a labrador but if a 10yo wreck of a mongrel appealed to me I would take it in preference. It may be a pity purchase but nothing wrong with that.

I have taken cats from a shelter on this basis, ones that no one else would take. It worked well. I would do the same for a dog but I wouldn't be interested in what they thought I should have. I would go looking for a future friend. You don't have someone telling you who your human friends can be and I spend far more time with my animals than with humans.
I would happily look at very good and detailed pictures rather than walking past every dog. Then I would like to go and view the half dozen possibles I had selected but if a different one took a liking to me that would be the one.
The dog and the owner have to have a bond. To be successful the dog has to have the "wow" factor for that person. May be the ugliest mut ever but something has to click.

 

[smolmaus]

At the moment, it sounds like a lot of admin work for the charity, wading through applications for specific dogs which may be unsuitable, and maybe having 4-5 applications from the same person etc. If it reduces the admin load on their staff, it will ultimately reduce costs, and may enable them to help more dogs?

Yep. Not to mention wading through 200 unsuitable, lazy applications for a frenchie with a bite history and getting zero for a lovely little JRT or other "boring" breed is just absolutely demoralising.

I like the idea personally. I am pretty sure that is how the first rescue my mum went to worked. I was told her and my sister rejected a couple because they were "ugly" A different rescue then gave her a beautiful Bernese-mix pup that she applied for directly and then returned after 2 days, and thank god she did. Completely unsuitable home, a mess altogether. No system is going to work for every potential adopter so if BC want to try it this way then fair play to them, I hope it works. If you don't like it, look for a dog elsewhere. Not like there aren't enough needing homes.

 

[Bellaboo18]

Well, this is what I am now thinking, I am of the age where my children in the next few years will be having grandchildren and I need to know it is a safe dog so be better to train it yourself.

As much as I love staffies and have over 30 years experience with them, I wouldnt take on a staffie that had bitten anyone either. I have shared my experience before my own staffie bit my son at 10 months old it was utterly horrific.
Still would never put me off the breed still a very sad situation to be in.

When the time comes, do consider a rescue pup, so many are born in centres. The rescue we adopted from mainly have staffies or staffie crosses but seem to get a lot of puppies or mums to be.

 

[SilverLinings]

It will also heavily rely on how sensible and experience the staff making the matches are. I have seen several adopted homes fail (and the dog be returned) because the match was obviously unsuitable: e.g. hyperactive or behavioural-issue dogs given to first time owners, large and strong dogs given to small elderly adopters, large dogs given to homes with very small children etc. In none of the cases did the adopter request a dog like that, it was what the rescues deemed the 'best' match.

ETA there are other rescues that are excellent though, it's just that IME some rescues don't seem to train their staff very well on how to match adopters with dogs.

 

[cobgoblin]

It will also heavily rely on how sensible and experience the staff making the matches are. I have seen several adopted homes fail (and the dog be returned) because the match was obviously unsuitable: e.g. hyperactive or behavioural-issue dogs given to first time owners, large and strong dogs given to small elderly adopters, large dogs given to homes with very small children etc. In none of the cases did the adopter request a dog like that, it was what the rescues deemed the 'best' match.

ETA there are other rescues that are excellent though, it's just that IME some rescues don't seem to train their staff very well on how to match adopters with dogs.

This is the sort of behaviour that worries me. ' In none of the cases did the adopter request a dog like that ' says it all. Some people will be persuaded against their better judgement because the rescue says the dog is suitable. Not fair on the dog or adopter.

 

[Chucho]

Iirc we filled out a form for Battersea stating our situation and lifestyle plus roughly what we were looking for. Only one dog was a match. We went to look around the kennels at all the dogs to see if we liked any and only one stood out to us as being the one for us. Serendipitously that was the one they'd matched us too. He then had to pass a cat test, which he did with flying colours. When it's a large rescue with lots of dogs it's a good way to filter out those that are completely unsuitable for your situation and direct your focus. I don't remember it being take this dog or nothing. If I wasn't a breed enthusiast then it wouldn't put me off at all. As it is we have used breed specific rescues and they also always ask questions about you and what you want before recommending a dog

 

[Clodagh]

This is the sort of behaviour that worries me. ' In none of the cases did the adopter request a dog like that ' says it all. Some people will be persuaded against their better judgement because the rescue says the dog is suitable. Not fair on the dog or adopter.

But if you chose one because it was attractive to you, it might still have undesirable behaviours.
Anyway, no point to this, it would be a shame if we all wanted the same thing in life.

 

[Barton Bounty]

When the time comes, do consider a rescue pup, so many are born in centres. The rescue we adopted from mainly have staffies or staffie crosses but seem to get a lot of puppies or mums to be.

Yeah I defo will try there first

 

[paddy555]

No system is going to work for every potential adopter so if BC want to try it this way then fair play to them, I hope it works. If you don't like it, look for a dog elsewhere. Not like there aren't enough needing homes.

which is exactly what I did. The rescue I visited had this policy. I left and bought a puppy from a breeder. I would have considered a variety of dogs from the rescue but my choice not theirs. They lost an adopter. If this happens to the dogs trust or others who operate this then quite simply less will be adopted and more left in kennels.

Reading this thread it seems quite simply far easier to buy a puppy, mongrel or purebred, of your choice.
If I want another dog in the future I would happily take an older dog, one with problems, even an ugly one. However I simply couldn't be bothered to go through all this performance when the local farmers were offering me a cute BC pup which I could chose from their litter with no hassle at all.

I probably would prefer an older dog but the hassle of training a pup would be less than dealing with rescues who were sure they knew what I really wanted.

I'm sure that for some people if they choose their rescue dog themselves they will forgive it a lot more than if it is someone else's choice in which case it may well just be returned as an unsuitable match.
Having people walking around kennels may not be great for the dogs but having them being passed from pillar to post as they are returned isn't great either.

 

[meleeka]

I’m surprised that some posters seem to put the dog’s appearance over whether they’d actually be a good fit. Perhaps that’s precisely why this new system has been introduced?

 

[SilverLinings]

I’m surprised that some posters seem to put the dog’s appearance over whether they’d actually be a good fit. Perhaps that’s precisely why this new system has been introduced?

A lot of what I might lump in under the title of 'appearance' would include things like size and build. Breeds can also have particular temperaments. If I was looking for a dog at a rescue then I wouldn't want a dog larger than cocker spaniel-sized as physically I couldn't lift them, and would have trouble if they weren't already lead trained. I know and like the personality of cockers and a few other breeds so they would be my first choice (or crosses of said breeds). It wouldn't be about their looks though, and homing an odd colour/'ugly' specimen of the breed wouldn't bother me.

There are some breeds that I don't like for aesthetic reasons, but they are also breeds that have significant health problems (like brachiocephalic breeds) which would put me off even more than the looks.

 

[Mrs. Jingle]

I’m surprised that some posters seem to put the dog’s appearance over whether they’d actually be a good fit. Perhaps that’s precisely why this new system has been introduced?

I am not seeing anyone saying a dog's appearance per se is how they decide if a dog will suit them or not. Surely size preference, breed type be it mongrel or pure bred etc. Is more to do with what breed or type they feel will fit their lifestyle and home and work situation?

To say they are basing their preference on some sort of obscure non existent beauty criteria is pretty shallow and does not in anyway justify the arbitrary decision by these particular rescues to try and make that choice for them.

IMHO this new system will backfire badly and will result in less successful long-term rehomings rather than more.

 

[rabatsa]

When choosing the greyhounds at the trainers we did not walk round the kennels. Dogs up for rehoming were brought out for us to meet. We chose our first black boy because he did the greyhound lean on Mr R's leg the whole time we looked at the others.

 

[DabDab]

The problem with the DT is that what they say a dog's ideal home looks like can seem a bit random to me. I will sometimes go through and read the description for older dogs looking for homes and often struggle to understand, for example, why a particular dog has been designated for able to live with cats and other dogs or not. If, in a few year's time, my older dogs have passed on and I'm left with just Phoebe then I would look to rehome. But it seems that the dogs likely to be designated by DT as being OK with other dogs and cats are larger breeds, with the odd small dog popping up only because they have been in foster with a bunch load of other dogs and cats. And matching me on the basis of the dogs and cats living requirement with a Dogue de Bordeaux, a Foxhound or a Labrador (some of the selection on the website today) is not going to work on my end when my current dog is 7kg, and my home, lifestyle and dog management routine is entirely set up for small dogs.

It's not that it's a bad idea per se but I suspect that whatever algorithm they apply could lead to some fairly unsuitable matches.

 

[twiggy2]

Size, build, breed types, energy levels etc surely can all be put on the application form?
To be fair Maz was in rescue for so long she had been moved from one to another to give her more chances to be homed.
She was too much for most people who saw her, she has a beautiful face so lots of people wanted to meet and walk her but no-one took her home a lot apparently never got further than her coming out of the kennel to say hello.
She has been the easiest dog I have ever had but it's taken a lot of effort and work and at the time a very very flexible life and work.
I think blind meets could work for many dogs and new owners if they would give it a chance.
I don't think its wether you get to choose or not that makes it work I believe more often than not its that people either put the effort in to help the dog become the companion they want it to be or expect a ready made, we'll adapted pet.
I fostered dogs that came into the vets, I didn't get to chose when they came or what dog they were but they all touched me in some way and would have stayed if I could have given them what they needed long term.

 

[Clodagh]

I presume those who only like a walk round would also struggle, if getting a pedigree, with the breeder advising on which pup would suit you best?

 

[The Xmas Furry]

My local rspca centre is pretty huge. They stopped folk visiting on lockdown and have done ever since. However, applications are still made on line and if successful then you get to meet the dog, often 2 or 3 times or more.
They keep applications (like mine currently) on file and notify if a possible dog becomes available.
They don't match randomly.

Another centre a bit further away never rehomes any small ones with cats.

The likes of many tears rehome often where there must be another dog in the household. I don't want 2 dogs.

One breed rescue require a minimum £200 deposit on application, balance of at least another £300 prior to collection. However the application is to adopt, WHEN a suitable dog comes in, this can take months or longer as they don't have many, if any, in.

I've found it pretty hard so far in this last 10 days of looking, so anyone finding a small bitch needing rehoming (up to 7kg ish), will travel reasonable distances from SE, let me know!

 

[Clodagh]

Have you tried Wallace Kennels? At Writtle. I’ve no idea what they’ve got in at the moment.

 

[skinnydipper]

if by looking round you scared a nervous dog and made it hide or bark you would probably then ignore it,

Doesn't work like that for me, you have to look past that. I adopted a dog who was suffering from kennel stress, spinning and tail chasing. It's no wonder she was stressed, she had been returned x 3 previously, this was her 5th home.

Last time I had anything to do with the dogs trust about 10 years ago they didn't allow walk ins/visits everyone had to apply online first.

Last time I was looking for a new companion was 4 1/2 years ago. At that time DT didn't have all their dogs on the website and you had to visit the centre to see which dogs were available.

I’m surprised that some posters seem to put the dog’s appearance over whether they’d actually be a good fit

It's not about appearance or size or breed. I've had everything from a JRT to the big girl,who the rescue said was a mastiff X; mongrel or pedigree it makes no difference to me. But there has to be something about the dog that appeals to me and I need to feel we will get along and the dog will be happy here. So far that's worked for me.

 

[DabDab]

Size, build, breed types, energy levels etc surely can all be put on the application form?To be fair Maz was in rescue for so long she had been moved from one to another to give her more chances to be homed.She was too much for most people who saw her, she has a beautiful face so lots of people wanted to meet and walk her but no-one took her home a lot apparently never got further than her coming out of the kennel to say hello.She has been the easiest dog I have ever had but it's taken a lot of effort and work and at the time a very very flexible life and work.I think blind meets could work for many dogs and new owners if they would give it a chance.I don't think its wether you get to choose or not that makes it work I believe more often than not its that people either put the effort in to help the dog become the companion they want it to be or expect a ready made, we'll adapted pet.I fostered dogs that came into the vets, I didn't get to chose when they came or what dog they were but they all touched me in some way and would have stayed if I could have given them what they needed long term.

But that's kind of what I'm getting at in terms of the DT currently seeming to have quite fixed ideas about particular home circumstances rather than genuinely being able to assess owners (no criticism of them really, it might be very difficult to assess potential homes in a broad-minded way).

I'll see on their site a description of a small terrier type (or collie type) who sounds exactly like a small terrier (or collie) type in a not great situation in terms of behaviour, but because they can be a bit snappy if another dog gets in their face, or don't like rough and tumble dog play, or can be a bit resource-guard-y they have been designated as no other dogs. When actually what they probably need is an owner experienced with that type, who doesn't expect a ready made dog, and have a home setup and routine that will work, and the presence of another dog (or cat) or not is not the most important aspect for consideration.

It's about how rehoming charities get beneath the superficial tick box criteria and look more holistically and the competence, management style and lifestyle of the potential rehomer. And I'm not sure how removing the one obvious non-tickbox element that is currently in the process will do that.

 

[The Xmas Furry]

Have you tried Wallace Kennels? At Writtle. I’ve no idea what they’ve got in at the moment.

I haven't, but will go look, ta x
For ref, I'm about half way between Heathrow and Gatwick.

 

[DabDab]

My local rspca centre is pretty huge. They stopped folk visiting on lockdown and have done ever since. However, applications are still made on line and if successful then you get to meet the dog, often 2 or 3 times or more.
They keep applications (like mine currently) on file and notify if a possible dog becomes available.
They don't match randomly.

Another centre a bit further away never rehomes any small ones with cats.

The likes of many tears rehome often where there must be another dog in the household. I don't want 2 dogs.

One breed rescue require a minimum £200 deposit on application, balance of at least another £300 prior to collection. However the application is to adopt, WHEN a suitable dog comes in, this can take months or longer as they don't have many, if any, in.

I've found it pretty hard so far in this last 10 days of looking, so anyone finding a small bitch needing rehoming (up to 7kg ish), will travel reasonable distances from SE, let me know!

Try Raystead in East Sussex

 

[meleeka]

I'll see on their site a description of a small terrier type (or collie type) who sounds exactly like a small terrier (or collie) type in a not great situation in terms of behaviour, but because they can be a bit snappy if another dog gets in their face, or don't like rough and tumble dog play, or can be a bit resource-guard-y they have been designated as no other dogs. When actually what they probably need is an owner experienced with that type, who doesn't expect a ready made dog, and have a home setup and routine that will work, and the presence of another dog (or cat) or not is not the most important aspect for consideration.

Realistically, how many owners are there like that? How would they know who was genuinely happy to accommodate the dog or who would say all the right things, then be bringing it back after a month because they were clueless and it attacked their other dog?

 

[splashgirl45]

I’m surprised that some posters seem to put the dog’s appearance over whether they’d actually be a good fit. Perhaps that’s precisely why this new system has been introduced?

So why do some people always have a certain breed? It’s a choice we make based on looks as well as temperament and suitability for our lifestyle. On this forum we own lots of different types of dogs , some love staffies and don’t like lurchers, I like pointy nose dogs and always have liked that type. The first dog I personally owned and not the family dog , was a deerhound, my next was a small lurcher and so on. I also like terriers and now have 2. You couldn’t give me a staffie or any of the poodle crosses but I know lots of people on here have them and wouldn’t want a lurcher or a terrier, so yes I go on looks first and I’m pretty sure most people do… it’s not wrong

 

[meleeka]

I haven't, but will go look, ta x
For ref, I'm about half way between Heathrow and Gatwick.

Have you looked at Raystede?

 

[DabDab]

Realistically, how many owners are there like that? How would they know who was genuinely happy to accommodate the dog or who would say all the right things, then be bringing it back after a month because they were clueless and it attacked their other dog?

There's a fair amount of us, but we rehome privately generally because we often fall out of criteria for the type we can offer a good home to on the big rescues, and the smaller rescues can be a bit whacky. There are rehoming places that already do a lot better job at matching people and dogs , e.g. Raysteade who I see you have also recommended to TFF.

As for being able to tell who is flexing the truth or not...firstly how many would lie in those circumstances? Why would I say that I can cope with resource guarding when I can't, just to acquire an 11yo terrier mix? Surely if I was that sort of person then I would just go and buy a puppy. And secondly, I think it is fairly easy to tell whether someone genuinely has experience of managing multi-animal households. Certainly when you have new people coming to flyball for example, you can tell almost immediately whether the owner is used to managing dog interactions or not. But you can't assess it at a distance based on the answers on a bit of paper, which is why I say I'm not sure this particular policy will do anything to really improve the chances for the less rehomeable dog.

A lot of the dogs that I've known who have bounced back to the rehoming centre again and again were dogs that were rehomed into the theoretically ideal environment, and most of them end up eventually finding a forever home in a less theoretically ideal environment, either through fostering, or a vet takes a shine or whatever.

 

[paddy555]

I presume those who only like a walk round would also struggle, if getting a pedigree, with the breeder advising on which pup would suit you best?

yes. I would find another breeder.

But there has to be something about the dog that appeals to me and I need to feel we will get along and the dog will be happy here. So far that's worked for me.

equally in this tick box exercise of matching people and dogs the dog has to get along with the prospective new owner. You have to look at the dog and click and the dog has to do the same. Not all dogs like all people.

Looks to me are very important. That is not if it is a beautiful show ring specimen. It can be an old mongrel wreck that I would find attractive plus the back story on the dog and what I can do for it.

 

[splashgirl45]

I got very frustrated when I tried to rehome a rescue dog. I wanted a dog who was the same size or smaller than my 10 year old collie and a similar age if possible but not a deal breaker if younger . I was retired but was out for 2 to 3 hours in the mornings when I rode and the dogs would come with me when I did the horse in the evening… I wasn’t successful, so ended up buying a puppy which wasn’t what I wanted but my collie needed company as she had never been an only dog and was struggling…. There didn’t seem to be any dogs in rescue who could go with another dog apart from many tears who had ex breeding bitches but the ones that may have been suitable were a 3 hour drive away so very difficult to test if the dogs would have got on

 

[Glitter's fun]

I've taken in a lot of rescue dogs from the same place. I walk along the line of kennels and catch their eye & see who dips their ears at me. Insisting on making the choice for me would send me elsewhere straight away.

 

[Jenko109]

For me, I personally struggle to build a strong bond with an adult dog.

When I lived at home, we took on a number of rescues. I was always heavily involved with the training and exercising, but I never bonded with the rescues in the same way that I did with dogs we got from a puppy.

So for me, although I would not discount a rescue, I would absolutely need to choose for myself. I would need to feel that emotional tug on my heartstrings. The vast majority of rehoming adverts, just do not give me that and popping a random dog in front of me and declaring 'this one is for you' is very, very unlikely to work.

I would have no problem with a breeder choosing a puppy for me though.