Opinions on Rescues

I am curious as to others opinions of how some horse rescues work.

Do you think rescues should take in every horse regardless of their means financially to care for them? I mean, if a rescue is basically telling supporters that they are almost out of funds or hay, do you feel it is ok for them to keep taking on horses?

Or what about adoption fees? What if the rescue took in a horse that was surrendered because the owner could no longer care for it. Just given to the rescue to find it a home, the horse is still in good shape, do you think it is ok for them to charge an adoption fee and if so what is a reasonable amount? Or what about horses that have been rehabilitated, what should a reasonable adoption fee be?

And what about listing all the horses they have at a rescue, do you feel the rescue should list all the horses, saying which ones are adoptable, not quite yet ready, or the ones that will be staying there?

I think that a rescue wouldn't be a rescue if they took in more animals than they could properly take care of. If they aren't receiving proper care, how are they rescued? So, no, I don't feel that rescues should take on more animals than they have the financial capability to feed, house, and care/medicate.

If a rescue only put up adoption fees for the horses they spend money buying, how would they get the funds to care for the rest of them? What about the ones they have to keep for whatever reason? Adoption fees are necessary for the rescue to continue the care and training or whatever is needed for the other horses. Say they spend 5,ooo on one horse, but the adoption fees per horse are only 1,ooo. They need to adopt out at least 4 other horses to cover the cost of just one. See what I mean?

Listing all the horses, regardless of appearance and state of readiness for adoption can be very off-putting to people who can't handle graphic photos, or only want the one with the hard-luck story. I think they are wise to be careful what horses they advertise...

bnttyra said:

Do you think rescues should take in every horse regardless of their means financially to care for them?

Click to expand...

Definitely not! If they do not have the resources to care for a horse, they have no business taking it in.

bnttyra said:

Or what about adoption fees? What if the rescue took in a horse that was surrendered because the owner could no longer care for it. Just given to the rescue to find it a home, the horse is still in good shape, do you think it is ok for them to charge an adoption fee and if so what is a reasonable amount?

Click to expand...

Most rescues are non-profit - their only income is from fundraisers and adoption fees. Even if a horse is "given" to them, by the time it is adopted the rescue almost always has some money invested in it, There is of course the food it ate in the time it was there. But there are often medical bills as well. An owner who has to surrender a horse because they can no longer afford to keep it, usually stopped trimming feet, worming and vaccinating, long before arriving at the decision to surrender. So at the least, in most cases, the rescue will have to expend money on a farrier and a vet, just to do the routine maintenance.

Typically a rescue will keep a horse long enough to evaluate it before placing it for adoption. By the time it is placed for adoption, they have money invested. And if they've only spent $500 but their adoption fee is $1000, all that does is make up some small deficit from a horse they had much longer and spent more than $1000 on before it was adopted.

bnttyra said:

And what about listing all the horses they have at a rescue, do you feel the rescue should list all the horses, saying which ones are adoptable, not quite yet ready, or the ones that will be staying there?

Click to expand...

I can't see the point of listing the ones that are not currently available for adoption. Website maintenance is time-consuming and costly - why spend the time uploading photos and updating information on a horse they're not even trying to adopt out?

Good points on the adoption price. That does make sense.

Another question, how long should it take for a rescue to have a horse ready for adoption. Lets say it only needed some hoof work and maybe a little weight. 3 months, 6 months, a year?

What if they took in 20 horses but after significant amount of time, only 4 or 5 are showing as adoptable, none of the others have ever been shown either in intake photos or even progression photos? Or there hasn't ever been even a list of the 20 horses, so you don't even know how many mares, geldings, stallions, whatever, but you know that they took in those 20 horses.

And what if the rescue is constantly claiming hardships, I get that it does happen, but if things get really bad like to a point where they claim they won't have any hay, would it be in the horses best interest to reduce the adoption fees to get them into homes?

Thanks for all the replies! I am trying to get a better understand of where this particular rescue is coming from.

Most of the people that I know that are involved in horse rescue are people whose hearts are bigger and deeper than their pockets. They don't have a facility where they can keep the animals they take in; they have to depend on members of the rescue group or others to donate a stall, paddock or other space for the animal for as long as it stays in their care. They may have a vet that gives them a major discount on services and supplies, but they don't keep a tally sheet where they add up all the hours spent brushing the animal, mucking out the stall, or otherwise interacting with the horse. For some, the only thing they can donate is time.

No, I don't think a rescue should take in more animals than they have the means to care for. Last year, a local rescue group took on a number of horses that were seized from a failed rescue in Virginia. The one that was at our barn was literally skin and bones, with a body score of 1.5. I don't know what he came from before the "rescue" took him in, but he was nearly starved to death by the very people who were supposedly trying to help him.

I have no problem with charging adoption fees, either. I know a lot of hard-luck horses that have hard-luck owners, too. The purchase price is just the beginning of a long list of ongoing expenses; if you can't afford the adoption fee, maybe the horse is better off staying with the rescue.

Listing all of the animals that are under the rescue's care might not be the wisest thing. As SA Farm said, some animals may look pretty gruesome, or they may attract a would-be adopter that really isn't capable of dealing with a particular animal's problems.

How odd. I didn't attach anything . . . must have been the cat. Teach me to walk away from the computer!

I hear your concern about this rescue. Yes, there are some people that are really hoarders, claiming to be rescues but only taking in and never rehoming. It's a tough call, since an animal isn't a machine, you can't just replace the broken parts and declare it good to go. A horse can look OK physically, but have mental issues that need to be addressed before it can be considered safe to rehome.

This particular rescue took in these registered horses, mostly mares and younger prospects, although the papers are no longer available. The horses were not in horrible conditions, some had some hoof issues and skin conditions that were not the result of bad care, just bad luck. There has never been even a list of what they took in, but I did see some photos so know that most of the horses were still in good shape at the time they went to the rescue. The rescue already had lot of horses and I believe these additional ones ended up with them having almost 70 head. Other rescues had offered to help but where turned away as this one particular rescue wanted them all.

It has been almost 18 months since they were taken to the rescue and to date, only about 5-6 of those horses have shown up as adoptable. Most were geldings and only 1 mare from this group that was made up of mostly broodmares.

I can understand not wanting to show pictures of those that truely look horrible or even those that are meant to stay at the rescue permanently but from what I understood, they were all to be adopted out and NONE looked horrible. I beleive that the person in charge of the rescue wanted this herd and has decided to keep a majority of the mares, as it seems they have completely fallen off the earth. When they were asked about it, they said that about half had already been adopted out locally, which is possible but I find highly unlikely given how remote this rescue is and the fact that they didn't make any attempts to list what they had for adoption.

They also within the last month, have been begging for more donations or funds as they claim they are in dire need due to illness and loss of income. What I found as very odd is today all of a sudden they post a new rescue. I don't understand if they are hurting that badly, why take in more? There as also been concerns brought up about the 501c status, or lack of. I wouldn't necessarily have issues except that very little about this rescue adds up to me, and I had hoped to maybe adopt one of the younger prospects from that herd but they have never said exactly what they have so I don't know if they have anything that would work for me. These were horses that were bred to do what I show my horses in and I was looking for a younger prospect from the original owner at one time.

bnttyra said:

would it be in the horses best interest to reduce the adoption fees to get them into homes?

Click to expand...

Human nature is to value that which we paid more for. In other words, when we have to work hard to acquire something, we value it more than if it were just handed to us with no effort on our part required. Adoption fees are one way of trying to ensure that the animal will be well taken care of and not treated "sacrificially" because it was free/has no value.

Bunnylady said:

if you can't afford the adoption fee, maybe the horse is better off staying with the rescue.

Click to expand...

x2. On average, it costs me $2000 per year to maintain a horse by the time I pay board, feed, farrier, and vet bills for routine maintenance. (And I live in an area where boarding costs are very low compared to other places.) In the event of a major illness, I might spend significantly more in a calendar year. The adoption fee is a drop in the bucket compared to what it will cost to keep the horse after the adoption.

bnttyra said:

This particular rescue took in these registered horses, mostly mares and younger prospects, although the papers are no longer available. The horses were not in horrible conditions, some had some hoof issues and skin conditions that were not the result of bad care, just bad luck. There has never been even a list of what they took in, but I did see some photos so know that most of the horses were still in good shape at the time they went to the rescue. The rescue already had lot of horses and I believe these additional ones ended up with them having almost 70 head. Other rescues had offered to help but where turned away as this one particular rescue wanted them all.

It has been almost 18 months since they were taken to the rescue and to date, only about 5-6 of those horses have shown up as adoptable. Most were geldings and only 1 mare from this group that was made up of mostly broodmares.

Click to expand...

Most rescues welcome volunteers - have you considered applying to volunteer at the rescue in question so that you can find the answers to some of your concerns? I can think of some valid reasons more horses have not been offered for adoption. For example, some may have been in such bad shape they had to be euthanized. Some may have been moved onto other rescues. And some may have been adopted out to adopters who already had applications in, and therefore never needed to be listed on the website.

On the other hand, there are also circumstances where rescues are mismanaged and though intentions were sincere, animals are suffering due to mismanagement. The best way to find out what is the case here, is to get involved.

Womwotai said:

Human nature is to value that which we paid more for. In other words, when we have to work hard to acquire something, we value it more than if it were just handed to us with no effort on our part required. Adoption fees are one way of trying to ensure that the animal will be well taken care of and not treated "sacrificially" because it was free/has no value.


x2. On average, it costs me $2000 per year to maintain a horse by the time I pay board, feed, farrier, and vet bills for routine maintenance. (And I live in an area where boarding costs are very low compared to other places.) In the event of a major illness, I might spend significantly more in a calendar year. The adoption fee is a drop in the bucket compared to what it will cost to keep the horse after the adoption.


Most rescues welcome volunteers - have you considered applying to volunteer at the rescue in question so that you can find the answers to some of your concerns? I can think of some valid reasons more horses have not been offered for adoption. For example, some may have been in such bad shape they had to be euthanized. Some may have been moved onto other rescues. And some may have been adopted out to adopters who already had applications in, and therefore never needed to be listed on the website.

On the other hand, there are also circumstances where rescues are mismanaged and though intentions were sincere, animals are suffering due to mismanagement. The best way to find out what is the case here, is to get involved.

Click to expand...

I understand how adoption fees help to weed out the not so good adopters, but if the rescue is in real trouble and these horses may end up with out food, doesn't lowering the adoption fee from say $500 to $250 seem more reasonable?

Most horses in my area are being sold for about as much as this rescue is asking for and those are ones with papers and no strings tied to the rescu for the rest of the horses lives.

The rescue isn't close enough for me to volunteer and again, if any of these horses had gotten so bad that they had to be put down, that would be entirely on the rescue as they were no where close to being that bad, worst one maybe was a 3. I have confirmed that no other rescue in the area was allowed to take any even after the months went by. When we asked about what horses they had so we could possible adopt, even filled out the silly application with the stupid weight question for everyone in the household even if they never intended to ride, we were told they would be posting them all soon, after the shed out their winter coats. That was last year at this time, I asked again and was told another time frame that never happened. They won't even just say they only have 5 horses left from that group, they won't say anything other than just asking for more money. I would have gladly spent the adoption fee money but since they won't tell me what they have other than the 5 they keep posting, I can't even do that. If they don't have anything else, then why won't they just say that?? I wanted one from that particular group, mostly a younger mare or filly, which they should have had plenty of, but they wont tell anyone what else they have but keep saying they still have 40 that need food.

I am fostering two minis from United States Equine Rescue League. They have been with me for about 6 yrs now. My part is volunteer. I don't ask for expenses back.