Craigslist's "small rehoming fee" for pets.

[stpauler]

According to Craigslist:
Partial list of items for sale and services the advertisement of which is not permitted on craigslist:

Household pets of any kind including but not limited to dogs, cats, primates, cage birds, rodents, reptiles, amphibians, fish. Re-homing with small adoption fee OK


With ambiguous language in these situations, you get a lot of problems. I adopted my dog from a person on craigslist for $100 (as they were in a major car accident and no longer able to take care of it and were going to surrender it to the pound if needed). I thought that was a fair small adoption fee for a dog.

I've seen however, people attempting to recoup all money they paid for a dog or cat. If they bought it and now don't want it, they want to "rehome" it for the price they paid + whatever food/kennel/toys/whatever. These are the ads which are usually reposted many times for being flagged.

On top of that, PETA has issues with pets being free. (Of course PETA also doesn't like pets and they call it "selfish")

So what should these fees be? (I'm only including dogs and cats on the poll, sorry)

[Waxwinged]

Free. For every adult dog up for 100$ there's a handful of free puppies, anyway.

[Nawth Chucka]

Free for both. If you get stuck w/ bills for an animal you can't afford maybe you'll make better choices next time.
Want to run your own rescue? Become a charity. But simply b/c you 'didn't realize' how expensive an animal was going to be is no excuse.

[Barrett Bonden]

I said $50 to $150, not to recoup costs, but just to weed out folks who haven't thought through the financial aspects of pet ownership. "Can I get a dog Mom? It's free. . ."

[Nawth Chucka]

Originally Posted by Barrett Bonden

I said $50 to $150, not to recoup costs, but just to weed out folks who haven't thought through the financial aspects of pet ownership. "Can I get a dog Mom? It's free. . ."

Good point, I hadn't thought of that.

[ZenBeam]

I thought the purpose of the rehoming fee was also to weed out people who would just turn around and sell the dog to medical researchers. I voted $1 - $50 for dogs. I voted free for cats, I think there's lots of them available already.

[Edward The Head]

Originally Posted by Barrett Bonden

I said $50 to $150, not to recoup costs, but just to weed out folks who haven't thought through the financial aspects of pet ownership. "Can I get a dog Mom? It's free. . ."

This is what my ex did when she had a dog that we could no longer keep. The woman who got the dog was very upset that she wanted to get rid of the dog and that she wanted money for the dog. She had a Bedlington Terrier and she only wanted money to make sure the person who got the dog knew what they were getting into.

[Munch]

$50 for dogs is ideal. It's low enough to not be a barrier to people who will care for the dog, but high enough to be a barrier to folks who are getting it on a whim and/or have no idea what sort of costs come with a dog. $100 might even be better.

[DrDeth]

Even the Pound/Human Soc has a small charge.

Enough to cover the last routine vet visit I'd say.

[markm]

Wait, you mean the cat fee isn't the current owner offering someone to take the hellbeast away for them?

[Oakminster]

I would not pay a dime to take in someone's pet. I'm doing them a favor by providing a good home for the animal. If I just wanted an animal, I have no doubt that I could have one by leaving food out in my backyard.

I would, and have, paid an adoption fee when I got a kitten from a reputable, no-kill shelter years ago.

And PETA is a group of whacked out nutjobs. I won't have anything to do with them.

[amarinth]

When I was looking for a dog on craigslist, the higher fees "to prove that I knew owning dog was expensive" really rubbed me the wrong way, especially since the fees weren't going to the care of the dog.

Paying for already incurred vet bills or microchipping or food made sense. A few places wanted vouchers from a local vet showing that I'd prepaid for vet care. Those were fine. If someone had said they wanted to see a voucher for specialized pet food from one of the gourmet/organic pet food stores around town, I wouldn't have minded. But I still don't see why handing some guy $400 makes me a better pet owner. If anything, it now means I have $400 less to spend on the health and feeding of the dog.

[Lynn Bodoni]

I think that requiring about $50-100 for both dogs and cats is reasonable, IF the animals have been given at least one set of shots. More if the animal has been chipped.

I say this mainly to weed out people who are not going to take care of a free animal, and to weed out the people who will sell the animals to medical labs. Yes, I do agree with animal testing, in some circumstances, but random source animals are not the best subjects for most legitimate tests.

We got our fourth cat because my husband's nephew and his family went off on a week long cruise, leaving an 8 month old kitten outside to fend for herself. No food, no water, no shelter, nobody to look after her. We hadn't planned on getting a fourth cat...

[Little Edie]

Originally Posted by Barrett Bonden

I said $50 to $150, not to recoup costs, but just to weed out folks who haven't thought through the financial aspects of pet ownership. "Can I get a dog Mom? It's free. . ."

That is my feeling, too. There have been a few animal torturers in my city (the real kind, not the urban legends) and I was told by a shelter employee that many just troll for free animals only, promising a happy life on a farm in exchange. Apparently just $20-$50 is too much of a bother for them. Same for people who get animals for free and sell them to labs or new owners.

I like amarinth's example of prepaying for vet care. I'm going to recommend that to some people I know who work in animal rescue.

[Smeghead]

We rehomed our dog on Craigslist this last year. We did it with no fee, because we genuinely only wanted him to have a good home - we didn't care about the money. However, in retrospect, I do wish we had included a small fee, because we had a LOT of responses, and the vast majority turned out to be flakes. A fee would have helped weed them out. I would have even been fine charging a fee, then refunding it after, say, six months if everything was still working out OK.

[Av8trix]

A nice compromise I've seen: The advertiser asks for 100 or so, but that money goes to a vet of the new owners choice as a balance on account or gift certificate, to pay for the next vet visit or meds/etc.

[stretch]

I have informally rescued animals for over 20 years. I always ask a fee, but usually that's just to weed out the flakes. In reality, I have always been willing to give the animal away once I have met the person and decided they are the appropriate person for the animal.

I picked $50-100 for dogs and $1-50 for cats because I have always had at least that much into the animal (usually including spay/neuter) before it leaves my home. If I have not had the animal altered, I require a prepaid vet certificate for that.

I have yet to make money back on any animal that I have rescued and it's not about getting my money back anyway. It's always about making sure the animal has a good home that I am comfortable having it go to.

[araminty]

What's all this about selling animals to research labs? Research specimens usually have a known providence, including genetic history, and are bred specially for the purpose. Does anyone have a cite? Sounds like urban legend to me... the predatory eeevil vivisectionist posing as a pet adopter and collecting Craigslist animals...

[Lynn Bodoni]

Cites:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK32665/

http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-10-945

http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=12641

While most labs do use animals that are bred specifically for testing, in some cases, labs use random source animals.

[CanvasShoes]

I definitely think there should be a fairly substantial re-homing fee (around $100). As another poster said, not to recoup costs, but to make sure the person is serious about the pet.

[Mama Zappa]

I voted 150+ for both. It weeds out people who aren't serious about pet ownership. If you can't afford that, you can't afford to feed / care for the animal anyway.

[Lynn Bodoni]

I'm not sure that I'd spend $150+ for a rehoming fee on a random cat, unless the person had vet bills showing that it had been fixed, was current on its shots, and possibly had been chipped. Otherwise, I'm likely to think that the person offering the animal is trying to gouge me, not that s/he's trying to ensure that the animal will go to a good home.

Now, the last time I took in a cat, I spent about $500 within a month or so of adopting her, because of getting her spayed, chipped, vaccinated, and a few other medical problems. For instance, she has a bump on the back of her head, and I asked the vet to go ahead and Xray it while she was asleep during the spaying operation. She had worms, and fleas, and I had to get those eliminated. Adopting a pet isn't cheap.

I'd be OK with someone wanting to know the name of my current vet, who will be happy to proclaim that I do, in fact, take good care of my pets.

[BigT]

Originally Posted by Mama Zappa

I voted 150+ for both. It weeds out people who aren't serious about pet ownership. If you can't afford that, you can't afford to feed / care for the animal anyway.

Seriously? I can easily afford to feed and otherwise take care of my dogs, and my entire household makes just over $30,000. There's no way I would have $150 of extra money just lying around.

[Candyman74]

Originally Posted by stpauler

I've seen however, people attempting to recoup all money they paid for a dog or cat. If they bought it and now don't want it, they want to "rehome" it for the price they paid + whatever food/kennel/toys/whatever.

Really? You'll spend thousands on a dog over its life. If people are adding all this up and trying to sell a dog for that price, are they successful?

[Palo Verde]

In my local Craigslist I saw a dog listed who wasn't housebroken (they had tried repeatedly and failed), wasn't neutered, has valley fever and required daily medication, has bitten children, digs, and wasn't up to date on shots. They wanted $100 for him.

Considering I would need to pay for the neutering, shots, medication and work with that pup extensively to help his bad habits, I think FREE is the only real option.

[Turpentine]

Originally Posted by araminty

What's all this about selling animals to research labs? Research specimens usually have a known providence, including genetic history, and are bred specially for the purpose. Does anyone have a cite? Sounds like urban legend to me... the predatory eeevil vivisectionist posing as a pet adopter and collecting Craigslist animals...

I can't thank you enough. I was coming here to say the same thing. I work in a lab and the beagles are purpose-bred from Harlan and and extensively health-screened. In most cases, they would be practically useless for research if they were not.

Nobody's collecting stray dogs and selling them off to the Bad Scientists who are going to do horrible, evil experiments on them because they enjoy watching animals suffer.

Craigslist usually asks for rehoming fees for pets to help ensure that the prospective adopter is truly serious about taking in the pet.

[Vegemiter]

I won't speculate on what the adoption fee "should" be for dogs because I know very little about their care & feeding.
However, I've been looking for a kitty on Craigslist lately (and found a real winner, thank you!) and came to the conclusion that anything up to $100 is reasonable for a kitten that has been altered/has its shots/is chipped, etc. because that is what most shelters charge. All those things cost money and to have them already taken care of gets you off to a good start. (I'm getting a 9-week old kitten from someone who adopted him at a shelter only to find out she was allergic--she's asking $75 and he's had all that done.)

However, the fee should be quite a bit less for an unaltered cat/kitten, one that hasn't been to the vet, etc. because the person adopting it will have to have the funds to take care of those things. That being said, it is still wise to charge at least $10-25, to weed out the flakes and ne'er-do-well's. An older cat should come with a lower fee as well, as it may require extra care and of course will have a shorter life span with its new person.

If you want to give kittens away for free--or even if you charge an adoption fee--be VERY careful who you give them to. I did that a couple times, and encountered one pair of bad apples. Fortunately I seem to have a "psychic link" with cats--or some of them anyway. Soon after I had given Sammy-Jo to these fellows, I had a dream that she walked all the way home - more than 5 miles--because they were mistreating her. Luckily they'd given us their phone number & address so we could check up on her. We paid them a visit, found out they'd given her to a neighbour because she "scratched/bit them." I knew that kitten wouldn't have scratched ANYONE without a good reason! Then their neighbour had let her get lost on the streets--so we had to go rescue her and ended up keeping her (which was fine by me!). Tell potential adopters if they dont' want the pet for ANY reason for goodness' sake, give it back before letting it loose! Sheesh!

[lavenderviolet]

Another problem with giving away animals for free on craigslist: They could be used as bait animals for dog fighting. The responsible thing to do is to charge a fee to try to weed out people who have bad intentions.

As for the fee to charge, I think it really depends on the animal. An old mixed breed dog, maybe $25. For a cat...well, around here the cat overpopulation problem is absolutely ridiculous and maybe $10 would be justified. If it's a young animal of a breed that's very popular (like a golden retriever or poodle) you would probably be justified in charging several hundred dollars.

[Hanna]

One of my friends posted a story on Facebook about an isolated incident where people collected free cats & dogs on CL and used them as live target practice. I don't know if it is true or not, but the fact that it names a specific place made me think it was real. That alone is a good enough reason to charge a small re homing fee to weed out people who want free pets for bad things.

I got 2 of my pets from shelters and the cat was $125 (neutered, shots, chipped) and the dog was $350 (same neuter/shots/chip). One of my cats was found and I paid for neuter/shots/chip myself and it was ~$300.

[moejoe]

I paid a $250.00 adoption fee for my dog, but she came from a rescue organization and they'd provided major life saving surgery before making her available. On the other hand, if I ever wanted a cat I would just go cruise through a mobile home park and grab a kitten from out of the scrabble.

[drewtwo99]

I would say up to 500 dollars might be fair.

[Toucanna]

It's not just PeTA that advises against giving away pets on craigslist. Most animal welfare organizations advise against it. There are some pretty messed up people who scour "free-to-good-home" classified ads looking for animals they can use for, well, not very nice things.

As for how much to charge as a re-homing fee, I think that in most cases, a fee comparable to what is charged by the local Humane Society-type shelter is reasonable.

Re-homing fees can be increased or reduced depending on factors such as the age of the animal, its breed, level of training, etc. I would consider not charging a re-homing fee in the case of a pet with ongoing medical issues (for example, thyroid supplementation), but only if the potential adopter had excellent veterinary and personal references.

[Pit and Rotti love]

Originally Posted by Mama Zappa

I voted 150+ for both. It weeds out people who aren't serious about pet ownership. If you can't afford that, you can't afford to feed / care for the animal anyway.

Honestly I disagree i have never paid over 60.00 for any of my dogs and never over 20.00 for my cats, i cant afford to pay large rehoming fee because i always spay/ neuture, micro chip, licence, all shots, and buy them a good harness and toys, food treats ect

[boytyperanma]

Originally Posted by amarinth

When I was looking for a dog on craigslist, the higher fees "to prove that I knew owning dog was expensive" really rubbed me the wrong way, especially since the fees weren't going to the care of the dog.

Paying for already incurred vet bills or microchipping or food made sense. A few places wanted vouchers from a local vet showing that I'd prepaid for vet care. Those were fine. If someone had said they wanted to see a voucher for specialized pet food from one of the gourmet/organic pet food stores around town, I wouldn't have minded. But I still don't see why handing some guy $400 makes me a better pet owner. If anything, it now means I have $400 less to spend on the health and feeding of the dog.

Originally Posted by Av8trix

A nice compromise I've seen: The advertiser asks for 100 or so, but that money goes to a vet of the new owners choice as a balance on account or gift certificate, to pay for the next vet visit or meds/etc.

I'm in agreement with these posts. If people want to include a fee for the purpose of weeding out potential pet owners the money should be going towards the pet in someway. Otherwise they could just be honest and let you know they are selling you the animal for their own profit. If someone wants to sell their pet they are more than welcome to just don't try to dress it up as something else.

[elbows]

I actually got my dog, free, off Kijiji. The owners had bought the pup from a breeder for considerable money. I was looking at Kijiji before posting something for sale and was interested in traffic. I was looking under pets to see how fast things moved. And I was stunned to see how much people were asking for dogs, though many were specific breeds. Then I came upon a dog that was free and checked him out, then carried on surfing through dogs that cost as much as $600!

A few minutes later I went to my hubby and told him I felt bad for this dog 'cause he was free! (I had lost my husky a couple of years earlier, he tried to tempt me into another dog, but it took a long time for me to be ready!) his response, without looking up was, "what are you going to do about it?" I went back to my computer and composed an email and sat staring at it for some time. In comes hubby and repeats his question! So I hit send!

Owner told me she didn't want money to be the deciding factor! Came to my house to see my yard, that I had a crate, (which I never used!), etc. I waited a weekend while she saw other applicants. But every time we spoke I told her I felt this dog was meant for me!

And he is a sparkling beauty, the happiest animal I've ever known. When his hair gets long he looks like every mutt from a children's book, kids love him. He literally makes people smile, I swear, I see them grinning whenever we cross streets etc. He's astoundingly awesome in every way! But we could never have afforded to pay what they did for him.

One parent was a registered show dog poodle the other a winning trials retriever, I know because the breeder called me, stunned to learn the purchasers had given him to me!

[$3Bill]

Originally Posted by Pit and Rotti love

Honestly I disagree i have never paid over 60.00 for any of my dogs and never over 20.00 for my cats, i cant afford to pay large rehoming fee because i always spay/ neuture, micro chip, licence, all shots, and buy them a good harness and toys, food treats ect

I don't see why the vet voucher system isn't automatic. The owner doesn't profit from someone actually doing them a favor by taking the animal off their hands, the new owner is demonstrably willing to sacrifice for the pet's care, and the pet gets the money.

[Richard Pearse]

The fee should be enough to reimburse the original owner for initial de sexing and puppy/kitten vaccinations. I said 50-100 assuming that's about what those fees would be.

[Sailboat]

Originally Posted by Turpentine

I can't thank you enough. I was coming here to say the same thing. I work in a lab and the beagles are purpose-bred from Harlan and and extensively health-screened. In most cases, they would be practically useless for research if they were not.

Nobody's collecting stray dogs and selling them off to the Bad Scientists who are going to do horrible, evil experiments on them because they enjoy watching animals suffer.

What, you decided not to read the links Lynn provided? It's not the source for a majority of research animals, but it absolutely does happen, is fully documented, and is even government-regulated (poorly, according to one of those links).

I realize you don't want people to think it happens, but that's immaterial to the fact that it does.

[Kevbo]

I'd charge a decent sized fee, refundable in three months when I see the animal healthy and happy in it's new home. I wouldn't advertise that, but if I got a good vibe from the new owner, that would be the deal.

I haven't seen any mention yet in this thread about sick fucks using free pets as bait animals for training fighting dogs.

[Rhiannon8404]

Originally Posted by Richard Pearse

The fee should be enough to reimburse the original owner for initial de sexing and puppy/kitten vaccinations. I said 50-100 assuming that's about what those fees would be.

Closer to $200 to $300.

[Rachellelogram]

There's no point in charging more than rescue organizations in the area charge for adoptions. If it's not cost-effective to get a pet off craigslist vs an area shelter, who would bother? I'd be willing to buy a vet voucher for up to $150, but straight cash? I'm not going higher than $75.

[starwarsfreek42]

I'd vote no more than fifty dollars. I rescue cats and I usually charge $25 or so per cat. That doesn't nearly recoup my costs ($85 for spay/neuter and checkup, $40 for shots and booster shots for each cat, plus cost of feeding, grooming, other medical care) but it weeds out people who are just looking for an accessory or a toy for their kids. I put the money into an envelope to go toward expenses for the next rescue.

[starwarsfreek42]

Originally Posted by Richard Pearse

The fee should be enough to reimburse the original owner for initial de sexing and puppy/kitten vaccinations. I said 50-100 assuming that's about what those fees would be.

No, it's closer to $200. If it's a large dog it'll be more--I spent $350 getting one 85lb dog neutered, vaccinated, microchipped and checked for worms.

[Tastes of Chocolate]

Originally Posted by Richard Pearse

The fee should be enough to reimburse the original owner for initial de sexing and puppy/kitten vaccinations. I said 50-100 assuming that's about what those fees would be.

Why? Someone has a pet that they can't or won't take care of any longer. I'm able to take over the responsibility for them. I should pay them for their miscalculations?

[aceplace57]

Classified ads for dogs and cats are in every newspaper. Why would Craigs List ban pet ads?

The first place that I look for a pet is my local paper.

[Palo Verde]

My local Humane Society does regular events in which they give away older than 1 year, mixed breed dogs and cats for free. They come microchipped, spayed/neutered, and with all shots.

[Richard Pearse]

Originally Posted by Tastes of Chocolate

Why? Someone has a pet that they can't or won't take care of any longer. I'm able to take over the responsibility for them. I should pay them for their miscalculations?

Because you are receiving an animal that is desexed and vaccinated. That is a cost that you would have had to bear if you bought a puppy from the puppy store. Presumably you want an animal? And if you couldn't find a suitable one on Craigslist you would be buying one from a breeder? If the cost of desexing and initial vaccinations is too much then you probably shouldn't be getting a dog.

If you buy a car off someone and it has new tyres and a recent mechanical check, you should pay at least that much for the car, regardless of whether the owner is selling it because they can't handle the responsibility of car ownership.

[starwarsfreek42]

Originally Posted by Richard Pearse

Because you are receiving an animal that is desexed and vaccinated. That is a cost that you would have had to bear if you bought a puppy from the puppy store. Presumably you want an animal? And if you couldn't find a suitable one on Craigslist you would be buying one from a breeder? If the cost of desexing and initial vaccinations is too much then you probably shouldn't be getting a dog.

If you buy a car off someone and it has new tyres and a recent mechanical check, you should pay at least that much for the car, regardless of whether the owner is selling it because they can't handle the responsibility of car ownership.

A car is a machine, not a living thing. A cat or a dog is a living, breathing creature capable of enduring great suffering. If I could no longer take care of my dog, and I knew someone who would take him for $50 and would take good care of him, even though I have spent thousands of dollars on him in the last 10 years, I would let them have him. My costs don't matter, the welfare of the animal matters, and that's the bottom line.

[Richard Pearse]

Well sure you can ask whatever you like of course and in situations like that both parties are getting a bargain.

[clairobscur]

Originally Posted by Lynn Bodoni

Cites:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK32665/


While most labs do use animals that are bred specifically for testing, in some cases, labs use random source animals.

I only read your first link, but there I read that all providers of pets for research purpose are licensed and divided in two classes. Class A providers breed pets specifically to be used in research. Those arent relevant. Class B providers are only used when it's useful for research purpose to have "random" animals (or larger animals, or older animals, etc...). Still according to the article, there are about 1000 of them in the USA. The overwhelming majority of them are otherwise directly involved in pet-related activities and the animals they provide come from said activity.

The author finally mention that only *11* people aren't, hence might provide animals taken from shelters, given by individuals, found, etc...and one of them had his license revoked, which leave us with 10 guys in the whole USA.

So your link in fact shows that any (potential) issue is going to be extremely marginal and that your pet is probably more likely to be struck by lightning at the moment you hand it to a stranger than to be sold to a laboratory.


Again, I didn't read the two following links.