You make some excellent points in your commentary regarding differing fees for dog adoptions. One of the rescue organizations that I support here in the St. Louis area, charges upwards of $250 for a puppy (regardless of parentage) while the fee for a senior dog is significantly lower, if not waived altogether. The rationale, as is explained on their web site, is that the fees charged for easier-to-place puppies allow the organization to help older or abused dogs, which can be much more challenging to place. Since Missouri is known by many as the "puppy mill capitol" of the United States (although our Attorney General has just announced a systematic and state wide crack down on these dreadful places), there will always be, sad to say, many dogs here to rescue. If the fees charged for puppies can help in the rehabilitation and re-homing of older or abused dogs, I support the seeming discrepancy.

Jill, I agree with Diana. I adopted my dog from a rescue group and I believe the fee was $250. My elderly neighbor, who ALWAYS adopted senior dogs, paid considerably less. Often times, people don't realize that seniors have a LOT of life in them and do make wonderful companions...a financial incentive does make it easier to place them.

Hi Jill,
I disagree with you that there should be one set fee for all adoptions. I think that there should be a different fee for puppies and very young dogs/cats vs. adult dogs/cats vs. seniors. As you know the cost of vet care is enormous & someone adopting a puppy and especially a senior will be paying dearly for their choice. The breed should have nothing to do with it.

I volunteer with a breed specific rescue in MD. Adoption fees from non profit rescue groups are often different by age and breed of dogs.

It's not uncommon to see higher fees for puppies/younger dogs that do help to fund care/ rehabilitation of older dogs.

Organizations that have "set"/miminum adoption fees are usually assisted by national rescue organizations that help fund a foster dog's expenses.

Shelters often have the luxury of being subsidized by tax dollars and access to very low cost fees and products so they can spread their costs over more dogs and keep their fees lower.

I foster and place dogs in private homes for a small national organization. We don't have the funding to have set adoption fees as most costs for fostering/prepping a dog for adoption are paid for out of the volunteer's pocket.

The adoption fees I charge vary and are based on real costs - pet transport services, spay/neuter, vaccinations, microchipping and other medical costs. My adoption fees do not include grooming, food, diet supplements (if needed), gas, crates (I have 4), leashes/collars, ID tags, etc.

I think that having lower fees for senior dogs than for younger dogs is reasonable. While an older dog may still have a lot of life in him, many people prefer a younger dog who will likely be around longer, and therefore an incentive to consider a senior is needed.

But I think that a shelter/rescue group that takes in various breeds or mixes should not charge different amounts based on breed alone. They have to pay for spay/neuter, vaccinations, and other care whether the dog is a rare purebred or a mix of unknown background.

Though not from your area, I have become a reader of this blog because of the relevant content. This article is no exception.

For years I have defended both sides of this argument (the conference room of my brain is littered with over-turned chairs, beverage cups, and strewn paper to prove it). All no-kill shelters are hurting for funding in order to continue the difficult and thankless work they do. The drain on their resources when large numbers of pets are dumped at one time – it seems as though this is a more prevalent occurrence of late – is forcing many to close their doors.

When a heroic adopter – one who is adding an animal to their family for no other reason than it’s the right thing to do – enters a shelter, they may request a worst case, and be rewarded by low adoption fees. The simple reason is that animal had little chance of adoption, and the lowered fees save the shelter money.

When a good hearted adopter – one who has particular size, breed, and health, demands – enters a shelter, their desires are shared by many. Supply and demand tenets follow. Remember, our culture regards these lives as property.

I don’t like it, but I also don’t like that we have been in this spinning wheel of animal abuse and neglect for decades, and we are not gaining ground. We are doing the same thing, and are expecting a different result. Isn’t this the definition of insanity?

No options we have tried are making a dent in feral, unwanted and over-populated pets. It is my belief that we must try something new, perhaps invasive. I think if we put a five-year moratorium on the breeding of dogs and cats, even the feral populations would decrease. Oh I know, all the breeders out there are becoming incensed already. I hear them now: But our rights! It is our right! Well, many of these well-intentioned breeders’ cute puppies and kittens are part of the population roaming the streets of America, as we speak.

Okay, if a moratorium isn’t the answer, someone needs to come up with something new, because I thought I just saw some conference room debris fly past me…uh oh.

At most rescue organizations, older dogs tend to have a more difficult time finding a home because most people are looking for a younger dog that comes with less "baggage" and will be with the family for a presumed longer period of time.

However, having a senior beagle at home whose available for adoption, I can say with certainty that my beagle is full of life, loves to go for romps in the backyard and long walks in the neighborhood, but also, really enjoys his nap time.

If the pricing for senior dogs were less than puppy/adult dogs, it may help place them quicker in their forever families...but...age discrimination also plays a role in who gets adopted and who doesn't.

I think the reality that there are certain breeds that are more desired than others has to be recognized and accepted.

Once you do that, using the adoption fee to steer undecided families towards less desired breeds and then use the money from adoptions of the more desired breeds to subsidize the care of other dogs is admirable.

In addition I would hope that they would be using a higher fee to discourage the adoption of "fad breeds" that are fashionable because of a movie or other media event. The classic example is dalmations after "101 Dalmations", this is a wonderful loving and energetic breed that many parents and children who desired them were unprepared for and ended up taking back to shelters. Using a higher adoption fee to slow their decision process and hopefully let the counseling they were getting from the shelter workers sink in.

The Humane Society is busted AGAIN.. These guys operate a second hand pet store and they only sell animals that have resale value, the rest are killed.

Every time you give a dollar to the HS you are enabling these people to kill more animals..