Category: Animal Charities

Rescuing dogs from abroad – does it make sense?

It is estimated that tens of thousands of rescue dogs are imported into the UK from the EU each year, a third of them apparently from Romania, but is it sensible and fair on the dogs? 

There has been an increasing trend in rescuing dogs and cats from foreign countries and transporting them into the UK, USA and Canada. Many people blame the strict adoption rules and costly adoption fees of UK re-homing charities for the popularity of adopting immigrant dogs and foreign bred puppies. Recent UK  Government figures show that the number of dogs imported under the Pet ravel scheme jumped from 152,075 in 2013 to 307,357 in 2018.

Following changes to the UK quarantine regulations in 2012 it has become a booming arm of the rescue industry. It has also developed into a craze or a fashion to do so fuelled as always by celebrities on social media Owners who give a home to the Mexican, Romanian or Spanish dog or cat obviously feel such rescues seem morally far more worthwhile, honourable and exciting with the bonus that they can boast to their friends that ‘I rescued the unfortunate thing from Romania’. 

British vets believe sitiuation is dangerous.

The British Veterinary Association (BVA) has recently (November 2019) declared that they can be “trojan dogs“ bringing in life-threatening diseases and are urging the Government to introduce mandatory health checks.

The  new UK “Lucy’s Law” aimed at ending puppy farming by restricting the sale of puppies and kittens to registered breeders and animal re-homing charities could have the side effect of increasing the trade in foreign import rescue animals and add to the number of charities being established.

As always there are reports that illicit ventures are cashing in on our wish to rescue dogs from abroad turning it into a commercial ‘trade’ whereby importers become pseudo rescue organisations, reaping rewards from importing and selling in the name of rescue.

The whole situation is another example of animal loving gone mad with too many wannabe animal saviours setting up dozens of small enterprises and charities to save dogs and cats from foreign streets.

Importing dogs from abroad, dog in gutter, stray dog
Many street dogs are well fed and are part of society with local people supporting them.

Although rescuing dogs from abroad is a laudable vocation, it is arguably an ill-conceived strategy mainly because transporting hundreds of dogs and cats at huge cost to countries that already have thousands of unwanted and stray dogs and cats, some of which end up euthanized, could be judged as a futile gesture and an ill-advised use of donated money. Dogs are still put to sleep in the UK, particularly those with behavioural problems, because of lack of homes and ability to rehabilitate them and many unfairly languish in rescue kennels for months or even years awaiting these mythical “forever” homes.

One major dog rescue charity once publicised a dog that had spent over 1,000 days in kennels before finding a home as a good news snippet, but is this an achievement to be proud of. Importing animals reduces the chances of ‘native’ animals finding new homes and extends their time incarcerated in kennels so realistically it might be better to concentrate on these before bringing more into the country.

Some question whether these dogs and cats need rescuing in the first place.

But this hasn’t stopped hundreds of small charities and outfits setting themselves up to save and rescue dogs and cats from abroad. Animals are arriving from countries such as Romania, Spain, Bulgaria, India, Thailand, Puerto Rico, China, Greece, Russia, and Mexico. Name any country perceived as ignoring and ill-treating their street dogs and no doubt someone is collecting them up and attempting to rehabilitate them into the ways of domestic pets.

There are critics who perceive a problem with this and question whether many of these dogs need rescuing in the first place as some street dogs in many parts of the world are part of society and accustomed to the lifestyle and freedom to roam and interact with other dogs. It is also pointed out that many local people support and tolerate them by feeding and looking out for them. Not all are looked upon as pests and ill-treated. I came across this situation forty years ago while attempting to set up a humane stray dog collection service for the government in Trinidad in the West Indies when locals became belligerent and hostile towards any dogs being removed from the streets.

rescuing street dogs
Some people question whether many street street dogs need rescuing in the first place.

Although some will fall ill and suffer injuries, such issues are better dealt with in their own country and not removed half way round the world. Bringing dogs in doesn’t stop others being put to sleep as many dogs, despite socialisation attempts and behavioural training before being sent overseas, often cannot kick their feral habits. There have been instances of imported dogs being handed in to rescue homes and of running away from new owners.

Health risks to humans and other animals.

The veterinary profession and health authorities have worries about importing a variety of parasites, pathogens, worms and other diseases and many vets caution against allowing such rescues.

Although imported dogs and cats have a “Pet Passport” under the Pet Travel Scheme (PETS)  the only requirements are for them to be vaccinated against rabies and tapeworm. But they can carry a multitude of potentially hazardous conditions that can affect humans and other animals. Eye worms and skin worms have been found in imported dogs and a variety of exotic ticks and parasites such as Leishmania infantum and Ehrlichia canis. Infected animals do not always show signs when adopted but can develop these life threatening conditions later and need a life-time of tests and treatment.

The USA has had leptospirosis and rabies scares by allowing hundreds of dogs in from Puerto Rico or across from Mexico. An organisation called Surfin’ Sato which rescues dogs from Puerto Rico recently had dogs put to sleep that tested positive for leptospirosis which is communicable to humans and stated, “our organization has decided to take a break from evacuating dogs while we evaluate the best strategy for ensuring everyone’s safety.” Health authorities had to track down all the people who had come into contact with the dogs at great expense.

Many dog charities question the validity of importing dogs from abroad.

It is not just health authorities that question the soundness of importing rescue animals, but other charities. We have a strange situation at the moment where some charities are increasingly “rescuing” dogs while other charities and organisations are trying to stop it from happening such as the EU Dog and Cat Alliance which has 80-member organisations across Europe including most of the UK dog charities. They believe:

  • International rehoming of dogs is unsustainable in the long-term, only provides interim measures and doesn’t address the root causes in the countries of origin
  • Presents a risk of spreading diseases across borders such as rabies, leptospirosis, tapeworm, parasitic infections, babesiosis and rickets from ticks, and Feline Immunodeficiency Virus (FIV) and FelineLeukemia Virus (FeLV) in cats.
  • Dogs, and particularly cats, rescued from foreign fields often fail to settle and suffer stress due to their backgrounds.
Would money be better spent improving conditions in the countries of origin?

The organisations and charities who arrange these transfers can raise considerable amounts of money on the back of showing the plight of dogs on their websites languishing in atrocious conditions in government pounds or on the streets with the by-line that ‘this is why we do it’. This kind of funding-raising  is incredibly effective as it tends to pull at the heart-strings of anyone who has got upset on holiday by the heart-rending sights of these poor miserable souls suffering from skin infestations, broken limbs and disease with little hope of any help. Realistically money would be better spent on improving the chances of these animals getting help and care in their own country, but this is a moot point.

puppies in dog pound, starving thin puppies, stray puppies, cruelty in dog pounds
Making conditions better in dog pounds abroad would benefit far more animals.

There are several international charities which are doing exactly that and who would welcome extra funding, but their work has little kudos associated with it and so those charities which export animals have the edge in raising funds  as we are more drawn to the happy-ending stories of the few animals that are saved.

Many of the countries that animals arrive from are not “third world” or “developing” nations but are member EU states and it could be viewed as insulting to behave as though they are incapable or less capable of dealing with stray dog and cat problems. Let’s be honest the UK and USA have never been able to get on top of their stray and feral cat crisis’s and still have a problem with stray and abandoned dogs so who are we  to criticise others. How would we like it if charities were opened in the UK to export our dogs and cats with pictures on websites showing how we were too uncaring and incompetent to look after them.

So does it make sense?

SO, does it make sense to import rescue dogs from foreign fields or streets? Probably not. Do these dogs impede domestic unwanted from finding new homes? Probably not. Are the oft stated risks and problems caused by these dogs overemphasized? Probably yes. It is undoubtedly a messy situation which causes considerable angst amongst various animal charities and the veterinary profession, but I’m sure you will get no argument from those individuals who have been saved from the wretched conditions they have been kept in certain countries and given the chance of a life worth living.

Blog updated November 2020

Foreign rescue dogs not to blame for U.K adoption shortfall.

The need to inspect and licence small animal charities.

Alarmingly and amazingly, anyone, regardless of experience or ability, can set up an animal rescue enterprise in the UK.

Puppy, behind wire, mournful
Indiscriminate breeding of animals needs to stop.

Over the last couple of decades there has been a proliferation of smaller charities and private organisations operating rescue re-homing centres and sanctuaries all working to their own agendas, often founded by well-meaning people, disappointed by the perceived ineffectiveness of the long-established larger national charities which they accuse of squandering money on staffing and administration costs.

The problems with small animal re-homing charities and sanctuaries

Most have an ethos of accepting any animal offered to them to ‘save’ as many as possible regardless of whether they have the proper facilities, staffing or finance to look after them adequately.

Many of these charities often go under through lack of volunteers or finance and the owners fail to seek help soon enough causing horrendous suffering, starvation and death by their “saviours”. It is a common problem the world over. Recent examples include a rescue on the island of Malaga where a hundred starving dogs were found and a horse rescue in Queensland, Australia was raided by Police who found dozens of starving horses.

Horse, thin, animal cruelty, horse cruelty
It’s not just dogs and cats that can suffer in failed rescue centres, but horses and other animals as well.

In the UK, alarmingly and amazingly, anyone, regardless of experience or ability, can set up such an enterprise. They are totally unregulated with no controls, inspections or licensing involved and this can and does result in animals that are supposedly being saved from substandard care and euthanasia being kept in similar or worse conditions. 

These rescues often become overrun with animals.

They are often one-man-bands operating on a shoe-string from the backyards or premises of the founders with few volunteers and back-up. Some begin through a form of hoarding whereby a person starts by rescuing a few dogs or cats and then decides it would be fun to turn it into a rescue or sanctuary not realising the implications, cost and responsibilities involved.

These centres are often in a position of becoming overrun with breeds that are the craze of the moment and of having to find homes for them as quickly as possible. This can lead to less stringent rules and policies on the suitability of new owners and animals can sometimes be given to owners that are questionable.

When we give money and support these smaller independently run animal charities we do not seem to investigate how well operated the charity is, what its aims are, its achievements and its expertise. Unless we are a volunteer or live locally to the charity we do not even make a visit. We are normally satisfied by the cute pictures they publish and the literature they produce. If they say they are saving animals, we are happy.

Many who trumpet that all their donated money goes to the animals often struggle to survive as they have no reserves to weather periods when donations dry up and find themselves unable to provide adequately for those in their care. This is particularly so with sanctuaries which keep them for life without attempting to find them new owners. The numbers build up to a point where the premises become overloaded and out of control with the helpers unable to give suitable housing and adequate care.

The Charity Commission has no remit to concern itself with welfare.

It often reaches a state where visitors or volunteers find themselves forced to report them to the authorities, which if they are a registered charity, is the Charity Commission. Unfortunately, the Commission are neither interested or have the powers to intervene when it involves welfare issues, only in monetary and trustee contraventions. Although local authorities and the police can intervene on welfare matters, the Commission is quick to pass the buck to the RSPCA.

This is highlighted by a recent case in 2017 involving the Capricorn Animal rescue where the Commission investigation report states:

“The [Charity] Commission is aware that the charity has been the subject of concerns from members of the public relating to the welfare of animals in the charity’s care; this does not fall within the Commission’s remit and concerns on this matter should be directed to the RSPCA.”

Placing the burden on yet another charity to investigate a similar charity is not an acceptable course of action particularly when the RSPCA is constantly accused of misuse of power and involving itself in legal matters which are perceived beyond their remit.

When other charities fail it is difficult to find other facilities for the animals. This burden normally falls on the major charities who are the only ones who have the means and logistics to step in, but this obviously places a burden onto them.

The new “Lucy” Law could encourage illicit animal rescues.

The new “Lucy law” which will ban the breeding and sale of puppies and kittens except from licensed breeders and animal charities could still leave an opening for unscrupulous traders.   The clamp down may cause a ‘shortage’ of available puppies and kittens which could increase the number of imported animals from foreign lands and encourage the setting up of pseudo rescue organisations.This has happened in the USA with imported rescue dogs.

With so many animal re-homing charities springing up, the control, regulation and inspection of these premises is an issue which urgently requires Government action before it gets totally out of control. Benefactors should also take a long hard look before donating and always be extremely careful to satisfy themselves of the soundness of the organisation.