# Bad Rescue Experience...... Long Read



## Rhoades

Well, I have bit my tongue long enough, here is my rescue experience so that others can avoid the headache I have had. 

Just prior to Thanksgiving our family decided to get a second dog. Being a police officer I have a soft spot for the GSD's. We looked online and made the desicion to get a dog from a rescue rather then a breeder. We went into the process knowing that there is always a bit of the unknown when getting a dog and more so from a rescue. 

We located a dog online from {Rescue name Removed by Admin. Wisc. Tiger, it against this Boards Rules to post an attack on a person or group.] (XXXXXXXXXX) and started the adoption process. They went to great lengths to make sure that my family and I were as we represented ourselves in the application paperwork. Everything checked out and we were given the green light. 

We made the 4+ hour drive through a WI blizzard to get the new dog. When we arrived we all went through seperate interviews as well as group interviews with the dogs foster mom. (We were there over 4 hours) Again, I understand that the foster mom gets attached and wants to make sure the dog goes to a good home so we didn't complain. All went well and we left with a new family member, Rango. 

Here is what we were told about Rango. 
-3 years old
-Clean bill of health
-Purchased from a reputable breeder (said they would locate the name and forward it to me) and then the family divorced so the dog went to the rescue
-Placed in a home and was too much to handle for the new owner and was returned just prior to being adopted by us

After we got home I took Rango in to the Vet because he seemed to be scratching his belly quite a bit. At first it looked like he had a scratch on his belly from playing in the woods and it got inflammed. Wrong, he had a serious case of sarcoptic mange. While diagnosing the mange, they ran a full blood panel and learned that he has a VERY heavy load of heartworm. The Vet said in her opinion he had been positive for quite some time. 

It seemed odd to us that they claimed he had been to the vet the day prior to us adopting him and that he recieved a clean bill of health so I started digging through his records that had come with him. I made one phone call (which I got from an old vet bill in his folder) to what appeared to be a previous owner. Here is what I learned from that phone call-

-The number was a rescue in IL
-Rango is AT LEAST 7!
-Was NEVER bought from a breeder, rather he was found by that rescue emmaciated and living in the woods. 
-Was adopted into several familes by that rescue as well but was returned for a variety of behavior reasons.

After learning that everything I had been told about him was untrue by making 1 simple phone call to a number THEY had, I was pissed. As a rescue why would you not make that simple phone call and be able to tell the new family as much as you can about the dog? They made a ton of calls to research me but didnt make one simple call to check him out. 

So I treated him for the mange (as well as my other dog as a precaution). 

We are in the process of treating for the heartworm (vet said to be ready to spend between $600-$1000)

And have a dog over twice as old as we thought. (through XXXXX they charge more for dogs under 3, imagine that)

I emailed XXXXX, told them of the situation and how unhappy I was and that our family felt like we had been decieved just to move a dog as fast as possible. I recieved a response that told me they would check with the board and see if they could help with the cost of the treatments but "its never possible to know everything about a dog so this stuff can happen". If it were just the heartworm I would agree and understand but not one single thing I was told has turned out to be true. 

Several months have gone by and there has been no response to my email. I emailed them again. Again no response. 

We will treat Rango with the best medicine possible, he is family and we love the heck out of him, but I feel like I should warn anyone else thinking about doing business with the XXXXX. 

I chose to share our experience with you in hopes of preventing this from happening to anyone else. 

[Admin. Note, if you would like to know the name of the Rescue contact the OP via PM]


----------



## middleofnowhere

What an ironic twist. I guess the intense investigation needs to go on both sides of the equation, something few of us have the inclination to do.


----------



## Prinzsalpha

Please private message me the info on the rescue. We are located in Wisconsin also and this is just totally unacceptible.


----------



## Riley's Mom

We, too, had a bad experience with a rescue so I can definitely feel for you. I would love to shout from the rooftops about that lunatic operation because they are not only crazy but make for dangerous situations and people really should be warned about them. As always with everything, there are unfortunately going to be bad apples in the bunch which then unfairly reflects badly on ALL rescues. 

I am so glad you were willing to do what you have done for Rango. It sounds like you've accepted that even though you didn't get what you thought you got, you still got a great friend and are committed to his health and well being. Rango is a very lucky dog to have landed in your hands.


----------



## Betty

First, I'm so happy Rango has found you. Even if it was because of the very questionable actions of the rescue it sounds like he has finally found a home which will take care of him.


I'm sorry this happened.


----------



## pupresq

> Quote: I guess the intense investigation needs to go on both sides of the equation, something few of us have the inclination to do.


Not around here!







As a shelter rep, I spend a lot of time checking out rescues. They're definitely not all created equal. Sadly, just like with anything there are good people and not so good people and sometimes in rescue there are people who start out with the right ideas and things go awry. There are groups who do every possible test and exam and know all their animals inside and out and there are people who turn animals over straight from the shelter "as is." And, of course, there are people who are not really rescuers at all but have discovered a way to exploit the system.

"Rescues" are not one thing any more than "breeders" are one thing. As with breeders, there's a spectrum and people need to find out who they're dealing with. 

Sorry you went through that. I have seen a lot of rescue bashing on this forum from people who didn't understand what rescues do, but in this case - I have to agree with you. Heartworms has a simple and easy blood test. To place a dog without checking that is not responsible at all.


----------



## Prinzsalpha

All info given on this dog was incorrect. WTH you rescue the dog and do not know the info to pass on to the potential adopter. Plus they did not do a heartworm test? OMG these are all basics IMO.


----------



## Rhoades

Sorry about breaking a board rule. Wasnt my intention. 

I am just pissed because it seems they did no looking into the dogs past. By saying he was 3 they got an extra $200 out of us. I would have adopted him either way and we love him all the same. Just frustrating that after I learned all of this they suddenly wont return a call or email. Hopefully I am an execption and not an example of how they do business.


----------



## Timber1

Also froward me the name of the rescue group via personal message. Like myyoung I am also from Wisconsin and what happened is totally unacceptable.

I do not agree with deleting the name of the rescue group. Sometimes we need to confront issues like this head on, and for some reason this board has been unwilling to do that. So instead of resolving the issue, we have a person that wanted to adopt a healthy dog, and a rescue group that should be given the chance to respond. This board is very good at deleting things which might be helpful to us rescues and the folks that adopt these dogs.

Oops, this also may be deleted.


----------



## Timber1

Unfortunately, there should not be such a rule. The problem rescues need to be named, as do the good ones. And lord knows if I name my rescue, which is among the best, the name will be deleted. 

We are from Wisconsin, so your post is especially important to the good rescues in the state. A post describing a bad expereince in Wisconsin simply casts unfavorible concerns about all Wisconsin rescues, and deleting the name of the rescue does tremendous harm to the good ones.


----------



## middleofnowhere

I think it's a matter of liability and lack of "staff" on the board to investigate & verify all claims.

Those of you so inclined might consider starting your own board that ranks, rates, scores, evaluates etc rescues. Talk with a lawyer first.


----------



## meisha98

I adopted a GSD from a rescue that supposedly was good with cats. We didn't question them or doubt it so we brought a beautiful 1-2 yr. old female found loose and emaciated home to our two cats. Turned out this dog had a very strong prey drive and after two weeks of attempting to get the dog in the same room w/o killing the cats, we turned her into a no-kill shelter in NH. We followed up with them and they said that after temperment testing her they felt she would stalk small animals and probably kill them. May have had to while on her own to survive. Never should have been placed in a home with cats. - Broke our hearts and taught us a valuable lesson- don't blindly trust information given! Have them prove it somehow. I can still here her howling when we left her that day.... She went on to be adopted to a one person home and hopefully led a long and healthy life. I'll always think twice before adopting or rescuing another dog.


----------



## Jax08

Can I ask why you didn't return her to the rescue?


----------



## Remo

Another thing to consider is that even though a dog may be good with SOME cats, that does not mean all cats.

I had a foster who used to be on the sofa right beside my cat and they were friends. I took this dog to a home that had a cat that was not used to dogs and we nearly had a disaster. The cat ran, the dog chased, and they ended up behind a big piece of furniture and all **** broke loose. The bill from the emergency vet for the cat was over $1500.00. That was an expensive mistake, that was entirely my fault, to our rescue. 

Also, sometimes dogs act VERY differently once they are out of the shelter or foster home. I have had dogs that were perfectly fine here that tried to pull all kinds of stunts once they got adopted. They come back here and the behavior disappears. I don't know of too many dogs that won't test the boundaries in a new situation.


----------



## Timber1

The best question yet, and I also wonder about the OP.

As an aside if there are issues between a dog and cat, usually the latter is the problem.

So if the dog was described as being good with cats perhaps the animal is.


----------



## RebelGSD

I agree with Lea on the cat issue. I had a cat that would not run, and most of the GSDs would be OK with him. If the adopters cat would run, most dogs would chase. I really did not like placing any dogs into homes with cats as it can be a gamble as to how the relationship would develop and I don't enjoy getting yelled at after all the time and effort I put into the dog. Often, dogs are just curious to meet the new housemate, at other times prey drive may kick in. Also, dogs can act differently in different settings. They do need an adjustment time in a new home and there are some adopters who expect a saint (from the first minute) to be handed over to them. If I make the effort to train the dog, the dog will love and respect me, it does not mean that he/she will act the same with a stranger (even if the stranger is an adopter). In a relationship with a living creature, what we get out of it is often proportional with what we invest into it.

The story of the OP seems to have more aspects. Why did the original rescue not treat the HW and why did they not take the dog back? How did the dog end up with the second rescue that new nothing about him. It is wonderful that the poor boy is finally in good hands. BTW, veterinarians around here often totally overestimate the age of neglected rescue dogs. The dogs tend to look years younger when they recover and get cleaned up.


----------



## GSD101

Now wait just a moment,,,,,, THIS WAS MY FOSTER DOG

This dog was UTD, HW tested neg. and on preventative. Is it
possible to get a false reading? The vet says that in extremely rare cases a dog could have all same sex worms that are not
reproducing. Can't help but wonder that if this happened back in
Nov. why they never contacted me. We certainly would have
been willing to help. They never even responded to my follow-up
emails and phone calls after the first few days. Our vet also indicated that he believed the dog to be around 3 yrs old.

Yes, I spent a lot of extra time with this family as they had never
owned a GSD before. I gave each family member an opportunity
to individually spend some one-on-one time with Rango. They
were probably here a couple hours.

The fee information is also erroneous. Our fees are clearly stated on our website and there is a $25 difference between dogs under 5
years old and dogs over 5 years old.

This dog lived in my home He had no skin conditions, mange
and wasn't even itchy when he lived here. Does this look like an unhealthy, mangy old dog

http://www.gsraw.com/Dogs/Durango/Durango%20HE.htm

XXXX Rhoades finally returned my emails this morning. Now that he
is communicating, perhaps there is something we can do to help
him out. I'm still waiting to get the name of his vet and a 
phone number.

If anybody has any further questions or wants addl. information, feel free to email me direct [email protected]
Due to extremely limited spare time, I do not visit this website on a
regular basis. Thanks Jo Aschauer GSRAW

PS I am proud of our rescue and all the good work that we do. You can feel free to print the name.


----------



## RebelGSD

Interesting, this dog certainly does not look 7 years old.


----------



## pupresq

Yeah, I totally agree. From those pics 3 is the more accurate estimate. I'm not sure when the dog was adopted and retested but if the dog was first HW tested in November, then it's quite possible he was harboring immature HWs at the time but that they didn't develop into a detectable infection until recently. don't know where he came from originally, but in high HW areas, we recommend retested at 6 months for this reason. IF that's what happened, then the HW infection should be mild and he (at three years of age at least) may be a good candidate for the slow kill method which is both cheaper and easier on the dog. He would need some x-rays and further bloodwork to know for sure.


----------



## OkieAmazon

Rhoades, please post your experience with the name of the rescue here


http://www.gsconsumerreports.org


----------



## meisha98

Jax 08- The rescue was too busy and we got permission to bring her to the no-kill shelter. I just think the Rescue was so busy she didn't get tested correctly or they didn't check at all. We DID relay the dog needed to be good with cats and we were SPECIFICALLY told she was as we were getting ready to take her home. Maybe not their fault as they were probably just trying to get her a good home, but a lesson I learned the hard way. Also the cats were sisters and used to GSDs. They tried hard to be friendly with this dog.


----------



## Rhoades

I just spoke with the vet used by the rescue. 

They have no record of the dog EVER having a heartworm test!!!!!

They do have record of a wellness exam. But they specifically said that DOES NOT include a HW test.


----------



## pupresq

Is it possible the group uses more than one vet or does some work themselves? Of if he came from a shelter, he may have been tested at the point of origin. It may not be what happened here, but I know that's the case for a lot of groups, so trying to brainstorm different possibilities.


----------



## Rhoades

pupresq- I hope thats the case.


----------



## maggs30

pupresq you are over your PM limit. Please clean some out.


----------



## pupresq

oops!









Should be some space now. Thanks for letting me know!


----------



## Rhoades

Update- The rescue never tested the dog. "Since he came from another rescue that said he was negative and was neutered, he must have been negative".

They adopted out the dog based on word of mouth HW negative. They keep saying "we treat HW positive dogs all the time so if we would have known we would have simply treated it." They should have checked, plain and simple. 

If a dealer says "Of course the car runs, look it only has 1/2 a tank of gas so it must run!" you would still start the car right?

I keep being told "You should have called me right away". I did one better then call the old foster mom, I EMAILED THE DIRECTOR OF THE ORGNIZATION! I was told I will get back to you and then never got a response. 

Unreal...............


----------



## pupresq

Agreed! You always want to test a dog or have documentation of any vetting. When we get dogs from the shelter unless they come with vet records, they get everything all over again. I hope it gets worked out for you. Thanks for sticking by the dog. He's a beautiful boy.


----------



## Lauri & The Gang

I'll second the 'do the tests yourself' advice. I just got an update email from the people that adopted my foster Maltese. They love him, adore him, their vet said his heart sounds perfect ... oh, he did THROW UP some worms.

Throwing up worms means a HEAVY load!! The paperwork that came with him said he had been wormed weekly up until the week prior to coming into rescue.

I forwarded the update email to the lady running the rescue and said we need to worm ALL the pups coming - no matter WHAT the paperwork says.


----------



## Prinzsalpha

When you purchase a dog from rescue worms, heartworm and all other test should have been done prior to adoption. That is why they are in rescue at least 3 wks b4 adoption.


----------



## Timber1

And lord knows the good rescues spent an awful lot if $$$ making sure the dogs they place are perfectly healthy.


----------



## Riley's Mom

> Originally Posted By: Timber1I do not agree with deleting the name of the rescue group.


They have to keep it off or they could be sued.


----------



## Riley's Mom

> Originally Posted By: RhoadesUpdate- The rescue never tested the dog. "Since he came from another rescue that said he was negative and was neutered, he must have been negative"


I thought reputable rescues would require documentation of things like heartworm testing/results, spaying, not just verbally one rescue to another "tested negative" or whatever. I would think they'd require all vet paperwork to travel with the dog or be faxed or whatever. Seems like that kind of policy is smart, gives them credibility and could save their butts in a lawsuit or in other types of problematic situations.


----------



## RebelGSD

If the dog did not have the heartworm test, the rescue certainly made the mistake of trusting the word of another rescue.

I wonder how the mange was diagnosed. If the dog had mange, the resident dogs in the foster home would also have it which does not seems to be the case. Resident dogs, contrary to the popular belief, are not disease or bite resistant and foster parents will not knowingly risk the health of their own dogs. Some vets will treat strong itch as mange even without finding mites as mange can be hard to diagnose.

As to the age of the dog, the GSD in the photo is definitely not 7, I have seen many 7yo GSDs. Apparently this information comes from the previous owner who dumped the dog. We have learned the hard way that the word of the person dumping the dog has to be taken with a bucket of salt. They can talk badly about the dog, to justify their own actions. 

As to the communication, there are conflicting statements. The adopter says the rescue did not communicate, the foster parent says that the adopters stopped communicating after a few days. Hopefully, the communication issues can be resolved now.

As to three weeks being sufficient for the dog to be clear of worms, that is definitely not the case. The fecal often comes back negative when the dog has worms (a good example is MatsiRed"s thread in the "where are they now" section). Some dogs need multiple dewormings over months to clear the worms. I would not place a dog into a home where the adopters are unwilling to continue treatment of the dog for worms. Also, the dog can pick up worms in a park the day after adoption.

Nobody can guarantee a healthy animal, they are not appliances that can be tested easily. The best that a vet can say is that they don't see signs of illness at the moment of the exam. It would take thousands of dollars worth of tests to rule out the many potential lingering diseases and the dog can still come down with something on the first day in the adoptive home. We encourage people who are not happy with the dog, for whatever reason, to return the dog. We would not want our dogs in a situation where the family is not happy with them.

Even thought the adopter is upset about it, the rescue devoted a considerable amount of time to the family to give them the opportunity to get comfortable with the dog before making the decision about the adoption. It also seems that they they were thourough with the reference checks etc., which is good practice.


----------



## SouthernThistle

I have mixed feelings about this post. 

I really hate seeing honest people getting screwed over. On the other hand, I also don't appreciate dishonest/embellishments to a story.

The OP claims that the rescue "got another $200 out of him" because the dog is (supposedly) 7 years old instead of 3. Right on the rescue's website, it states the following:

Age: 0-1 adoption fee $275
Age: 1-5 adoption fee $250 
Age: 6+ adoption fee $225

How is $250 - $225 = $200?

FWIW, I know several rescues (even of other species) that charge more for younger animals than older ones. Why? It's pretty much supply and demand. More people want to adopt younger dogs than senior dogs so lowering the adoption fee is an incentive. I've even adopted a senior dog from a rescue whose adoption fee was set at $200....and then waved when the adoption was approved.

I see nothing wrong with the rescue's adoption policy as well. It is also clearly stated on their website. 

I'd like to know how the adopter reached the conclusions of the dog never having a HW test, etc. Was this information provided to him by the rescue? With the health paperwork that came with the dog, there should have been documentation showing that there was a HW test performed. Was that information not found on the health paperwork?

I also agree that the dog in the pictures does not only not look 7 years old, but also does not look like mange. If anything, sounds like an allergy or a staph infection, but I'm not a veterinarian, I didn't see the dog, and I didn't perform a skin scrape.

I am sorry "Rhoades" had a bad experience with one rescue, but I think this story seems to waver a little bit on 100% truth (on both sides).


----------



## Timber1

This post has produced a lot of questions. I wish the OP would clarify.

I do know the rescue group the OP is talking about, but until either the group or OP would clarify the issues raised there is nothing to add.


----------



## Rhoades

I KNOW the dog was never tested for HW. I know this because the vet they used told me when I called to ask. When I went back to the rescue and told them the vet said he was never tested, they recanted on the "We tested him just two days ago" and said they had no reason to test him as he had been neutered and no vet would neuter a HW positive dog. They also said the previous rescue told them he was HW negative. In looking through the paperwork the rescue gave me, they had in their possesion the entire time they had the dog, the neuter and HW test done by them was over a year old and was done in October 2007. HW tests should be done every year, rescue dog or not. How could they tell me he was HW negative from a test that was over a year old??

I have forwarded the copies of the unreturned emails to the foster mom. If you doubt the lack of response by the rescue I would be more then happy to post them here. 

I did return several calls and emails after adopting Rango. Heck, I even took and sent photos via email for their webpage. Did I keep an ongoing dialouge with the rescue? No. I don't see the need in checking in with them on a weekly basis after I adopted him. 

As soon as I learned of the HW issue I contacted them, proved by dates on my sent messages and copies of the unreturned emails. So, let's see- several calls and emails after adoption, several emails a month (or so) later when the HW issue arose. How often am I supposed to talk to them? 

In regards to the foster families dogs contracting mange- The foster mom kept the dogs seperate at all times so I'm not sure if this could prevent them from getting it or not. The vet tested Rango with positive results for sarcoptic mange via a skin scrape. The vet said it did not look to be a new case either due to the hair loss in his belly. This was on the same visit as the HW test. 

As for the difference in fees. I thought there was a much larger jump in fees for younger dogs. I obviously misunderstood and I apologize for that, they only got an extra $25 then!







The paperwork we have from the previous rescue has Rango, then named Lucky, at 3 years of age in 2005.

The rescue says they will cover the cost of the HW treatment. I will update if that happens. 

Hopefully that clears up some questions. If you have more, just ask and I will answer them as soon as I can.

Chris


----------



## Timber1

Chris,

your update is appreciated. This sounds like a group from Wisconsin I decided not to foster dogs for. But LOL if either of us named the group our reply would be immediately deleted even if the info provided by us was 100 percent factual.


----------



## WiscTiger

Timber1, Stop with your snide little remarks about what is and what is not allowed on the board. It is getting old and shows your utter lack of respect for this board.

Wisc.Tiger - Admin
Val


----------



## Timber1

LOL, why not being willing to allow us to post the name of a rescue group that is harmful is viewed as a snide remark astounds me. 

That is why so many among the good GSD breeders and others avoid this board. Perhaps another mod would be helpful.


----------



## JeanKBBMMMAAN

Another mod would say the same thing. 

Breeders and rescues who are not doing as they should-and after a post such as this or others-where the original poster will PM you the information. Then there's no problem, other than following the rules and saving you from possible problems legally.


----------



## Timber1

Enough said; however, I am disappointed this board is not more proactvie. I do not agree with the possible legal implications.


----------



## Rhoades

Just for the record I did not know it was against the rules to post the name. I have no issue with my post being modified. I wasnt trying to break the rules!


----------



## JeanKBBMMMAAN

No problem. 

And heaven knows, I have big problems with any rescue not following best practices, because who gets bit in the butt generally? The dogs. And sometimes people are hurt with them-either way, not the way to do things. 

Thanks for understanding.


----------



## WiscTiger

Rhoades, no problem we understand that you are a new member and didn't review the rules before you posted.


----------



## WiscTiger

Timber1, if you disagree with the policies of this board, feel free to start your own board where you can set your own rules.


----------



## Jazy's mom

> Originally Posted By: Timber1Enough said; however, I am disappointed this board is not more proactvie. I do not agree with the possible legal implications.


That is real easy to say when you are not the one that would be facing legal action. 

As others have said, if you don't like it here then start your own board. And if you really don't like this board, then why do you keep coming back?


----------



## 3K9Mom

And, as someone pointed out, it appears neither party has been 100% reliable in the retelling of the story. I could run a 100% above-board rescue and someone could come online and tell a story that is filled with inaccuracies, if not outright lies. 

In a setting like this (which is often back and forth posting), it's often hard to discern who is telling the truth. If allowed to post names, a disgruntled or reckless adopter could trash the good reputation that a rescue has worked very hard to achieve and maintain for years with just a few key strokes. 

The story could be a complete lie. Perhaps an adopter was turned away. The person could manufacture a dog that he "adopted" then tell all sorts of ghastly details about how badly everything went. It's nearly impossible to defend against a ghost. Of course you have no records.

I've seen some pretty irrational unstable people walk the halls of this forum, and I know you have too, Timber. We often don't agree, but I'm sure we can agree on that. 

Do you really want to give that sort of person the ability to ruin a rescue or a breeder without recourse?

It could be your rescue they try it with. I know your rescue does good work. I'd hate for it to be yours.


----------



## Riley's Mom

Unless it's for a specific *cause* I don't think a forum board is supposed to be pro-active. The purpose of this board here in my understanding is to share information, make friends, have a good time, show off their furbabies, get some new homes for needy dogs, help with what they can .. and on down the road. Just like unless you're a vet here, you're not going to give actual medical advice, for example .. and a smart vet not looking for legal problems isn't going to diagnose on a forum board. They might make some "it might be this or that" comments but a smart vet is going to cover his butt by adding "see your vet" kind of comment.

For this type of board to be pro-active on anything would probably be a mistake that could bring on unpleasant legal consequences. 

I look at a board being pro-active as one for something like abortion or legalizing some illegal drug or something where it's more like a debate discussion board with two distinct sides to the issue. I would imagine even boards like that have specific rules to follow so THEY don't get sued. These days you REALLY have to watch what you say, our society is just to blankety blank sue-happy!


----------



## Jax08

Personally, I don't think this forum is the appropriate place to discuss this particular topic at all. There are always <u>*three *</u>sides to a story (his, hers and the unbiased facts) so it's not appropriate for anyone not directly involved to voice opinions/assumptions for either side.

The OP's original post was full of frustration (and who could blame him?) and he got some really good suggestions on how to proceed, how things should be done in a rescue, raised some concerns/reminders for other rescues to check into. Anything after that is a he said/she said. Whether people agree or not, it is certainly NOT the responsiblity of germanshepherds.com to police what rescues are doing.


----------



## Rhoades

My whole intention of posting here was not to get the rescue to do anything about the situation, I had written that off. 

My intention was to let those who may be considering dealing with or adopting from that group know that they may need to do a bit extra homework and fact checking. 

Anyone who has any questions or doubt the accuracy of my claims can feel free to send me a PM and I will give you my cell phone number.


----------



## Jax08

I'm not doubting your claims. As I stated, "who can blame you for your frustation?" Not Me. I would be upset also.

All I'm saying is nobody really knows the rescue's side of it. It may be somebody just dropped the ball, in a big way, with your dog. It could be a one time thing. Or it could be happening all the time with this rescue. 

As a police officer you should know that once people are involved and emotions kick in, the facts can get skewed to a certain point of view. That's why there are three sides to a story. That doesn't mean anyone is lying. It just means a person might not have all the information.

My point was that it is not germanshepherds.com's responsibility to police the rescues. And by doing so, could hinder the intention of the Rescue portion of this forum. After all, what rescue would want to participate there if the administration did that? 

Not to mention the slander issue that could arise and then the whole forum would be in jeopardy...thus the reason I don't think this the appropriate place for the rest of this discussion. Maybe a consumer affairs website might be more appropriate if anyone wants to start throwing names around.


----------



## RebelGSD

I cannot help but seeing contradictions in these posts.



> Originally Posted By: RhoadesI just spoke with the vet used by the rescue.
> 
> <span style="color: #FF0000">*They have no record of the dog EVER having a heartworm test!!!!!*</span>They do have record of a wellness exam. But they specifically said that DOES NOT include a HW test.





> Originally Posted By: Rhoades *<span style="color: #FF0000"> I KNOW the dog was never tested for HW. I know this because the vet they used told me when I called to ask.</span>* When I went back to the rescue and told them the vet said he was never tested, they recanted on the "We tested him just two days ago" and said they had no reason to test him as he had been neutered and no vet would neuter a HW positive dog. They also said the previous rescue told them he was HW negative. <span style="color: #FF0000">*In looking through the paperwork the rescue gave me, they had in their possesion the entire time they had the dog, the neuter and HW test done by them was over a year old and was done in October 2007. *</span> HW tests should be done every year, rescue dog or not. How could they tell me he was HW negative from a test that was over a year old??


Several times the OP claims that the dog "NEVER" "EVER" had a heartworm test and than in the same paragraph he claims that the test was done over a year ago? Which statement is true? There is a huge difference between the two, having never done a test and not doing within a yearly interval. If the dog tested negative in October 2007 and positive 1.5 years later, it means that it contracted heartworm in the meantime. In that case it is very unlikely that the load developed over 6-12 months is very heavy as stated in the first post. The heartworm test is not really quantitative, although some vets like to interpret the heavy load based on color and the speed of color change. There are no formal studies showing that an accurate estimate of the load can be done. There is the odd chance that the test is false negative or positive, I am not sure who can be blamed for that. If the HW infestation is new, treatment with HeartGard could even be considered.



> Originally Posted By: RhoadesAfter we got home I took Rango in to the Vet because he seemed to be scratching his belly quite a bit. At first it looked like he had a scratch on his belly from playing in the woods and it got inflammed. Wrong, he had a serious case of sarcoptic mange. <span style="color: #FF0000">*While diagnosing the mange, they ran a full blood panel and learned that he has a VERY heavy load of heartworm. The Vet said in her opinion he had been positive for quite some time.*</span>



Apparently the dog had a wellness exam before the adoption.



> Originally Posted By: RhoadesI just spoke with the vet used by the rescue.
> 
> They have no record of the dog EVER having a heartworm test!!!!! <span style="color: #FF0000">*They do have record of a wellness exam. But they specifically said that DOES NOT include a HW test. *</span>


It seems that the vet who examined the dog dropped the ball and missed the mange. It is unfortunate not only for the OP but also for the foster as several dogs could have contracted the mange. I feel that if the dog was overdue for the heartworm test, the vet should have asked for that. It seems that the rescue assumed without veryfing that everything necessary was done in the wellness exam without veryfing themselves (a mistake). I see both the vet and the rescue dropping the ball here, but I don't really see the malicious deceipt as claimed in the posts. 

By this time it has been shown also that the claims that the rescue made extra $200 by lying to the adopter about the age of the dog is not quite right. Looking at the photos I would say that the claim that the dog is 7yo is malicious. He looks like 3yo to me. It is up to the OP whom to trust regarding the age of the dog. Personally, the last one I would trust would be the person who dumped the dog.

Again, there is a lot of conflicting information in this post and it is hard to judge it without seeing all the documentation and hearing the facts from all sides.

I totally understand the frustration about adopting a HW+ dog that also had mange, but I do not see malicious intent or deception from the side of the rescue. I hope that the rescue will cover the expenses of the heartworm test.


----------



## RebelGSD

To Timber1: the foster of this dog stepped up and posted rescue info as well as his/her name in response to the post. The foster also provided the personal e-mail address for questions. So the rescue involved in this is known as well as the foster parent. I am not sure what else you want posted here. Everyone reading this post can make an educated decision as to whether they want to deal with the rescue.


----------



## RebelGSD

I meant to say that I hope the rescue will cover the HW treatment.
I would repeat the test though, since there is one positive and one negative test within 1.5 and the dog was supposed to be on prevention (it is not unheard of that prevention failed).


----------



## oregongsdr111

Just my two cents : )

As a person that operates a rescue, and is accountable for all that goes on with it, I can say we have made mistakes.

No rescue is perfect no matter how long you have been in exsistence. We have adopted out two dog with terminal illnesses. We did not know, and we felt horrible. We had a lung cancer, and a brain tumor. Both dogs had well health exams, and were acting normal (new recue normal) in our care. After a very short period in the adopters homes, (six months or so) the adopters noticed patterns of behavior that we did not notice. Both dogs have now passed. 

We felt terrible. We offered to match vet care costs, and we offered a no fee adoption if they were willing, and able, to take on another rescue dog. Both adopters waited a time period, and when they were ready they did adopt from us again. So far everything has gone well with the new adoption dogs. 

We had another dog recently that was adopted, and the dog was diagnosed with a heart murmer. The adopter was raving mad at me. This dog had been seen by a vet at the shelter prior to surgery, and by our vet for our well health exam. Never a mention of an issue. The adopters vet wanted to run very expensive tests (1600.00) to comfirm. We offered to have further testing done and pay for it, but at a neutral vet that was rescue friendly. These people promply gave us the dog back and they hate us. I am sure if they belong to a forum of any sort we were blasted. We did take the dog to a third vet, and there was no sign of a health issue. 
When he was re-adopted we disclosed the issues from the last adoption, and their vet agreed that the dog was healthy.

I think all we can do as a responsible agency is to try and make it right. We will pay for any pre existing illness diagnosed on one of our dogs, "IF" the adopter is willing to use our vet so we can get our discount. 

From my shelter life I have seen to many of our County shelter dogs killed due to vets overstating the diagnosis and illness. If its cheaper to euthanize vs treatment, the dog usually goes down. 

I am sorry the OP had this experience, and I understand the frustration of adopting a dog that is ill, and requires treatment ASAP. I know we would work with our adopters to try and make it right, but not all adopters are willing to work with you if they feel you have slighted them.

Sometimes Vets can overstate, even manufacture things to make money off of the unknown history on a shelter, or rescue pet. I have many Vet Tech friends that back me on this statment. A rescue should not be responsible for the up sale of a clinic. That is why we say, our vet or no deal. Or at least a vet in the adopters area that our vet reccommends.

When a rescue adoption goes bad it hurts us all in the long run. Every unhappy adopter, or refused adopter that tells their story refelects on every rescue, as we can all be lumped together.

I know I hate it when things go bad, but it is going to happen. We just need to have good policies, and hope it works out for all in the end.


----------



## RebelGSD

Great post Paula!

Yes, it can happen. Our vet missed a torn ACL on a dog that they have seen three times and kept hospitalized for three days. We were yelled at by the adopter and even the vet tried to put the blame on the rescue. Interestingly, people rarely go raving mad at veterinarians who miss things, the blame is always on us volunteers. Somehow people who get paid (to make their mistakes) get more respect than people who care for the animals out of the goodness of their heart.

I agree with the assessment that there are quite a few vets that are malicious with rescue dogs and have a deep need to put them down in terms of age, health, appearance or behavior. I can only guess that it makes them look better in front of the adopter/their client if they can act as savior that acts in favor of the client as opposed to the rescue that "has to have something bad in their agenda". And unfortunately many adopters chose to believe the worst about their dog and the rescue. 

Another aspect of rescue is that a living creature (with little or no history) is not like an appliance that can easily be checked for proper functioning (now or future). It is even harder to guarantee health in the future. To people who want guarantees that their pet is and will be perfectly healthy we recommend that they go to a reputable breeder and run all the health checks (which are expensive) that they consider important. Even then, there is no certainty that the dog will not develop a serious condition two months later. I have no way of knowing that I won't come down with a serious health problem myself in a month or two from now.

The only sure way not to make mistakes is not to do it at all. Our volkunteers often question themselves, after getting put down and screamed at, why they are doing it.


----------



## Rhoades

Rebel. The rescue told me "He was just in to the vet and everything checked out including a HW test". 

They stood by that claim that they had recently tested the dog before adopting him out. 

When I presented information that showed THEY HAD NEVER tested the dog then they back pedaled and said "Well WE didnt test him but we were told he had been tested negative when we got him". 

If that is the case then the only test they can be refering to, the only test I can find record of in the dogs history, was over a year old at the time. 

Answer me this... How often should a dog be HW tested??

Even if the rescue was going off the old test it was out of date and he should have been retested. 

That still does not explain the constantly changing story regarding when/if the dog was tested. 


As for the mange, who knows. If the HW issue had never exsisted then I would have never questioned anything. When added to the HW issue then it starts to look fishy. 


The rescue has said that they will make it right. If they do I will gladly delete my posts here. I will let you know if a check shows up.


----------



## Rhoades

I totally understand there that is no warrenty with an animal. That does not excue rescues from checking out the animals health before adopting him out. Its actions like that that push people away from the idea of adopting from a rescue.


----------



## pupresq

I think you're probably right that it does, but a bad experience with a rescue group _shouldn't_ push someone away from adopting any more than buying a dog from a puppy mill should push someone away from buying a dog. Rescues are not all created equal and exist across a spectrum of responsibility and ethics as do breeders. One rescue group can't be held accountable for another's actions any more than a reputable breeder should be held accountable for the poor practices of the BYB down the road. 

IMO and in my group all dogs are HW tested on intake. The only exception to that would be if we had documented proof directly from another veterinary clinic that a test had just been done. Dogs with unknown histories should be tested every 6 months since it can take that long for HWs to show up. So, if we tested a dog at intake, we would probably still test them before placement if it was 6 months or more later. All dogs, regardless of history, should be retested annually. 

As to why that didn't happen here, I don't know, but am glad to see the rescue is going to pay for HW treatment. I think that's the fair thing to do if the dog was represented as being HW free at adoption. 

Please let us know how it goes!


----------



## BowWowMeow

I am glad to hear that the rescue is going to pay for the HW treatment. I agree that a mistake was made and I'm glad it was caught before your dog got ill. 

As for "pushing people away from adopting," there are actually quite a few people on this board who have purchased very expensive dogs from reputable breeders and the dogs have ended up with serious health problems. That doesn't seem to be pushing anyone away from buying dogs from breeders though. Fortunately I think people understand that the volunteers who run the rescues are human and do make mistakes.


----------



## Timber1

Good or bad I would have liked to hear from the rescue. As I mentioned my experience with this rescue was different, but disturbing like the OP's.

As for the moderator that mentioned snide remarks from me I did view that as a personal attack, which I thought was prohibited.


----------



## RebelGSD

Our veterinarians recommend testing once a year. 

If we take in for a wellness exam and the dog is due for a HW test, the veterinarian will tell us that, as well as which vaccinations the dog is supposed to be getting. We never had a dog test positive for heartworm while in our care after initially testing negative. I know of one case in a local rescue where the dog tested negative, was adopted out as negative, was on heartworm prevention in the adoptive home, and then suddenly collapsed with advanced heartworm disease. The dog was OK after the treatment. 

While we become experts in health issues with time, I feel that we should be able to rely on veterinarians concerning vaccination and test schedules. 
This dog's HW test was obviously overdue by a couple of months (yearly tests are the common recommendation) and I feel that both the rescue and the vet carry responsibility for that. It is not true that the dog never had a test done though. It is bad luck, and very unfortunate for the dog, that within the 1.5 years the dog contracted HW in spite of the prevention. The rescue should cover the cost of the treatment (at the vet of their choice, not necessarily the most expensive vet that can be found) since they represented the dog as heartworm-free.


----------



## RebelGSD

Timber1, the rescue in question posted and you can read their response in the thread. I remember you posting negative about the rescue you contacted before your current one, but at some point you posted negative stuff about your current rescue as well (without naming it and everybody on the board knew which rescue you were talking about). It was quite a stir, I remeber it well. It seems that there are few rescues that are perfect at all times, if we look hard enough we will be able to find mistakes in everything and everybody. You also criticized pupresq's rescue. The only one that was consistently rated positive in your posts was the one your daughter works for. That one differs from the rest as it has paid professional full-time staff and more resources than the rescues in question.


----------



## pupresq

True. A large metro humane society is operating with an entirely different set of resources than our tiny (even if Herculean) volunteer efforts.


----------



## Remo

Our rescue has actually had a couple of dogs that tested negative for HW, got put on preventative and then showed up with HW+ on their test later on. I would normally question whether the adopter actually had kept up with the preventative, but in these cases I would not. The vet gave a lengthy explanation of the life cycles of the worms and how this could happen. 

Perhaps because so many dogs have passed through our rescue the likelyhood of this happening is greater. But I do know that in rare cases, this can happen.


----------



## pupresq

Do you know how long the interval was? This is exactly why I think dogs with an unknown history should be tested at 6 month intervals for the first two tests - at least in areas of high HW incidence. 

Here's my understanding: From the mosquito bite that infects the dog, it takes 6 months for an adult heartworm to grow in the dog and start producing the antigens that the HW test detects. Monthly treatments like heartguard back treat, killing any microfilaria that the dog has acquired during the previous 45 days. So...when you pull a new dog and you test them and they test negative and you give them a HW preventative, you kill any microfilaria they contracted in the last 45 days and you rule out any existing adult HWs, however there's a 4-5 month or so window in there where the dog could have been bitten by an infected mosquito and the HWs are now in a stage where they are neither detected by the HW test nor killed by the HW preventative. If you wait 6 months and test again then you've eliminated that window.

You can see cases of hws crop up like this is puppies who aren't started on HW preventatives until they're 6 months old because owners misunderstand the thing about a dog can't have HWs until they're 6 months old. They can certainly contract them! They just won't test positive until 6 months after they're bitten so there's no sense in testing a 6 month or younger puppy because they're not old enough to harbor the adult worms that trigger the test. However, any time prior to 45 days back from the first dose of HW preventative, they can still get HWs which will become detectable 6 months after that bite. 

Now, we don't hold all our dogs for that long and we don't guarantee the dog will be free of HWs. If we have the dog more than 6 months then we retest, if not, we explain what our negative test shows and what it does not show and the owner adopts the dog with that understanding. Thankfully, dogs who test negative and then positive, at least in theory (not sure what's up in the OP's case), should have a relatively minor HW infection because it's so new, and should be good candidates for the slow kill protocol which is much cheaper and less painful for the dog. I've never actually had a dog test positive after we tested it and it was negative, but I've heard of it happening to enough other people that we've adopted this protocol.


----------



## Prinzsalpha

We just had a incidence where the foster mom adopted one of her dogs. Had tested negative and this spring tested positive. He had been on a 12 month program of taking Heartgard. With the vets help they contacted Heartgard and they are paying 100% for the heartworm treatment. Its nice to know that Heartgard stands behind their product 100%.


----------



## ILGHAUS

There are cases where a dog can be given the treatment every month and still come down with heartworms. This happens sometimes with dogs with a digestive problem of some type as the medicine may pass through before being taken in by the dog. 

My EPI boy came down with heartworms and was given his treatment on schedule. His HW was low positive so I continued giving his Heartgard (under the direction of his vet) but I started giving it a little differently. Instead of giving him the whole chunk I chopped it up in a bunch of smaller pieces and stirred into his enzyme treated food just before feeding him. He is now HW-.

Don't always assume that someone did not follow through on a preventative if a dog comes down with heartworms as there may be another reason other than one or more missed doses.


----------



## Jazy's mom

TJ, thanks for adding this. I too have heard that if the dog does not chew the HW preventative then it may not be as effective.


----------



## Alto

> Quote: I do not agree with the possible legal implications.


Sadly this is a naive stance; if you have many free hours, you might go back & read the entirety of this anecdote: the OP's claims were based on an actual experience, the List owner thought he had sufficiently protected himself from lawsuits that might arise from online discussion ... 








is sometimes the _better_ option.


----------



## Timber1

I need to get off this topic, but you may also remember my response involved concerns, not criticisms, so again, no personal attacks. And I did not name the name of the group, which you may have forgotten.

Considering your memory is so great please provide a personal PM regarding my specific comments. 

Futhermore, you should also remember that in my opinion, stated many times, there is no better rescue group then the one I am currently working with.

As for my daughter, why drag her into this. I did not even know they work with that specific group.


----------



## Timber1

One more note. If you actually work with the Humane Society you are referring to please send me a personal note. I assumed you group would be on the Internet but could not find it. 

Anyway, regarding rescue, I would appreciate your opinions, so if you can back away from criticizing me and referring to my daughter (please, never again), I would love to give you a call and send a personal E Mail. I have tons of questions and perhaps you can help the rescue effort.

Appreciate your consideration.


----------



## pupresq

> Quote:One more note. If you actually work with the Humane Society you are referring to please send me a personal note. I assumed you group would be on the Internet but could not find it.
> 
> Anyway, regarding rescue, I would appreciate your opinions, so if you can back away from criticizing me and referring to my daughter (please, never again),


Timber1, can you reference the posts you're talking about? I don't see anywhere that Rebel said she worked for a humane society or criticized your daughter.


----------



## RebelGSD

Timber1, you kept rubbing it into everybody how much better the humane society where your daughter works is than all the rest of us. Nobody would even know you had a daughter if you did not keep bringing her up and how much better she and her humane society are then the rescues on this board. You are welcome to look up your own posts on this board where you kept putting down others. There are plenty of those and I can assure you that they way you word your "concerns" is perceived by the targets of your "concerns" as being put down or criticism.


----------



## kathyb

Thank you for adopting this boy Rhoades and making sure he gets the medical help that he needs. Most of us I am sure knew what rescue this is about or do know now. The hope is that everyone has learned something from this thread and that will make things better for the dogs and people who adopt. I think it is now time for all of us to put are time and energy in helping the dogs that are now in need of help!


----------

