Cat 002

Top Dog Blog

Read the latest goings on within HALO and in our community here on HALO's Top Dog Blog, written by Heather Allen, HALO's President and CEO.

To Fee or Not to Fee?

Posted: Monday, August 30, 2010

By: Heather Allen

To Fee or Not to Fee?

For HALO Animal Rescue, our adoption fee income makes up about 37% of our total revenue for 2010 so far.  Ideally, animal shelters do not rely heavily on their adoption fees to subsidize the work they're doing, and we'd like to get to that point as well, but this year won't be that year for us.  At the end of 2009, the "funded" portion of the Maddie's Pet Rescue Project of Maricopa County (a project that HALO plays a significant role in) also came to an end.  While there is some residual monies left in the Project's account to be distributed over the next two years to its partners, it isn't nearly as significant to HALO's income as the Project's funds were for the last 7 years (33% of our income then versus the current 2% of our income).  In the midst of making up for this financial loss, we are seeing more and more that low-cost and free adoptions help drive adopters our way rather than the pet stores, the newspaper and the other places that unscrupulous individuals put cash generation above animal welfare.  Low-cost and free adoptions also help catch the attention of the media, which helps get the attention of adopters and literally means lives are saved.  Two weekends ago, we partnered up with AAWL & SPCA and our agencies placed over 200 animals in one day, but at a large "financial loss" for the agencies in terms of cost-per-animal vs. adoption fees paid.  Even our regular adoption fees don't cover the cost of the services we provide to the animals prior to adoption.  I say all of this to lead to the point that I'd love to get some feedback on: as the adopting public, do you feel any sort of more or less attachment to your animals depending on how much you paid for them?  Do you consider bringing in a new pet as less of a commitment if you pay a small fee or get the animal for free versus paying hundreds or thousands of dollars for the pet?  Do you feel that a lowered adoption fee sends a message that shelters animals have less value than animals not in a shelter?  What would you do to keep the adoptions going while keeping your doors open and keeping enough resources available to help the animals that need much more than a roof over their head and some food/water and medical basics? 

23 comment(s) for “To Fee or Not to Fee? ”

  1. Emma
    Monday, August 30, 2010
    Personally, I would like to see all dogs and cats going for hefty fees. I think that HALO should continue to derive all the revenue it can from adoption fees. I think that relatively high fees in the $300 + range are a very good idea. They inherently screen some adopters who don't care enough to spend the money or really can't afford a pet. If you can't afford the adoption fee, how can you expect to take care of your pet if it gets sick or injured?

    I think that low adoption fees could have an effect on the amount of care certain people are willing to buy for their current pets. If they know they can buy a new dog for less than $100, why spend $500 on medication or vet bills? I don't think this describes everyone, but there are definitely people out there who don't value their pets, or get as attached to them as real animal lovers do.

    I would be very disappointed to see lower adoption fees. HALO needs all the revenue it can get to keep saving animals and the economics of higher fees are just better for the animals in my opinion. I would expect that people will still buy shelter dogs for fees in HALO's range, since people keep paying this much for puppy mill shop pets.
  2. AZBlizz
    Tuesday, August 31, 2010
    I think it is important to remember that the bond we feel with our pets grow over time. I have seen it. Someone who looks at their pet as...well, a pet, can become frantic and willing to do almost anything at the first sign that their...pet...needs help. Because over time, they have become their "baby". Assuming what kind of pet parent they will be based on how much the feel is appropriate to spend on aquiring a pet is dangerous.
    Also, being able to "afford" something and being able to "justify" the cost for something can be two different things. I could not have imagined the positive impact that my pets would have on me as a first time pet owner. I was young, repaying college loans, living on my own for the first time and really wanted a pet. I really couldn't "afford" nor could I "justify" spending very much money on a pet when I was just learing how to be an adult and all the expenses that come along with it. However, I am a heck of a pet parent. And when my pet, my "baby" got sick, I made it work. I picked up a couple of extra shifts to pay my parents back the money they loaned me to help me through that tough time. I learned how to save a little money for pet bills and became a more responsible pet parent in the process. I am so glad someone didn't brush me off or turn me away because I wasn't able to afford much at the time.
    We also cannot 'afford" to sit back and "justify" killing thousands more animals because someone wasn't willing to pay $300 for a 11 year old cat or a 2 year old pit bull mix. We cannot afford not to compete with the allure of the 'free to good home' ads. However, we do have the unique opportunity to educate the public about the importance of spay/neuter, microchip, vaccinations, etc WHILE saving a life. And we still use counseling techniques to try and match pets up. It isn't come in and pick one and we will wrap it up for you.
    People adopt a pet but they end up with a family member. We need to engage the community and not turn them away. They are the lifeline for our organizations and the animals.
  3. Tina Wooten
    Tuesday, August 31, 2010
    YES!! for paying the fees to Halo. That is an easy decision to make because Halo is a (SPECIAL) place for all dogs and cats who deserve the love, protection, safety, and vet care. What an amazing shelter to be in while awaiting for their Pet Parents to adopt them. If you haven't visited the Halo Shelter, you should! Those dogs, puppies, cats and kittens are surrounded with caring experienced individuals. I am concerned that we could create a circle of unwanted pets. With owning a pet there comes financial responsibility. Keeping your pets healthy with a vet check is not as easy as caring for pets and loving them. Things are great until you might have to pay a vet bill. So making it financial easier to adopt a pet isn't always the answer. We do not need more homeless pets on the streets or in the shelters. Halo has a big financial responsibility in caring for all these animals needs. We should all support them in everyway! Thank you Halo for my Precious Holly! Tina Wooten and Holly
  4. SL
    Wednesday, September 01, 2010
    I'm in the camp of having a decent level of adoption fees, and by decent I mean at least $50 or more. This is the first level screen of a person's commitment to the animal. I just adopted a cat this past weekend from Arizona Humane Society when they had their "name your price" adoption event. It drove traffic, but I question the ability of some of the folks to properly care for the animal they were adopting.
    Thank you Halo for the work that you do!
  5. Cj
    Saturday, September 04, 2010
    I've read a lot of opinions about needing to set high fees to protect the animals in shelters from being adopted by the wrong people, but most of the homeless dogs and cats are getting killed simply for lack of a home. I'd love HALO to get as much money as possible so they could save more from the county shelter system, but HALO needs to get as many animals adopted so they can get more out of the county alive. I've gotten "free" animals since I was a kid in the 50's - animals who had been dumped or otherwise lost their homes (with no one responding to my flyers about finding a dog or cat) came up to me and offered their love in return for a bed and a bowl. Vet visits are great, but they are a modern convenience - vets in the 50's saw herds of cattle and horses, very few dogs and fewer cats. It's true that lots of people can't afford vet bills, but they can afford to feed and house a dog and/or a cat, and low-cost clinics make it easier to get shots. People shouldn't have to be wealthy to save a pet's life, and pets shouldn't die (1000/week) because someone who wants to love them can't prove they can afford a $4000 back surgery. I was lucky enough to afford one for one of my dogs, but cried as the vet tech remembered her dog who had to be put to sleep because she couldn't afford the same surgery. First, let's get the dogs and cats out of the kill shelters into real or foster homes, THEN we can start figuring out how to help people afford caring for those who are faced with costly illnesses.
  6. Marsha Shrader
    Thursday, October 14, 2010
    I have been looking at the Halo site for about 4 months. I had to have my beloved Minnie dog put down last Oct. and am just now looking for another little one to love. However, I cannot afford the large fees for the dogs....I can do the monthly cost, food, insurance, ...just don't have the extra 200-300 for the fees. I understand the fees necessary, but I agree with Sabrina, a lower fee would allow for more animals to be saved. I just looked at your site and fell in love with Manny and Mr. Peabody....since I am alergic to dog hair, I need one that does not shed much and both are these fit the bill. If I could I would take all of them!

    Please keep up the wonderful work...I would volunteer but I am to tender hearted ...I would want them all. I hope all your little friends find homes that will love them and take care of them.
  7. Denise Caldwell
    Tuesday, October 19, 2010
    I grew up poor. Dirt poor. Trailer park and no shoes poor. But we had cats and we loved them and took care of them like the members of the family they were. I have more positive memories of my sweet loving feline sisters than I can possibly tell you and although you do not need to know this about me, I have to tell you that I think my sweet cat Taffy was the only thing that got me through a few tough years. While I understand the need for Halo to recoup some costs, I would hate to see hefty fees prevent a loving family from adopting a homeless pet. What a shame that would be!

    I would like to add, however, that I think it might be helpful if you would connect the dots for consumers that it is CHEAPER to adopt a HALO pet because of everything included (microchip, vaccinations, spay/neuter)....Delineating those individual costs and then adding those costs up for the potential adopter so they can see that they'd pay MORE for the FREE kitten than for a HALO pet might be very helpful. Anyway, thanks for all you do, and thanks again for sweet Sedona, adopted last weekend from the big Halo-AAWL-PetSmart event.
  8. Sabrina
    Tuesday, September 07, 2010
    I do agree with the fees that are being charged but in some cases I do feel they can be to high. Not everyone that is a good pet owner can afford high fees. I adopted a puppy at one of halo's adoption events at PetsMart and paid $500.00 for a 9 week old puppy we really love him and would do anything for him but at the time we would have loved to get him a companian his size but we could not afford to pay that price for two. In some cases the fees do need to be a little lower to help find more of the dogs a good home. I do know some people that would rather go to the pound because the prices are cheaper I have four dogs two pound babies, one from a breeder, and one halo baby I love all them the same. I will say that the ones from the pound I was able to go and buy more toys and treats for the day I got them because I spent less then $100.00 to adopt them. I do understand that it cost to care for them but in some cases finding a good home may have to be taken in consideration in the fees. I would also suggest maybe trying to work out with some families that dont have the means of paying a large fee to do foster for you to help cover some expenses.
  9. Kristen
    Tuesday, September 14, 2010
    I think that animals should be accessible to everyone, given that so many are killed in Arizona each year because they do not have homes. Even the Arizona Humane Society euthanizes cats on a very regular basis - the cats just need to come down with the very common URI and they are gone if there is no room in isolation or a foster home. Sadly, only 1/3 of the cats taken in ever get out of the AHS. It seems that the people advocating very high adoption fees do not know about the euthanasia that is going on in our state. And they truly might not - it's definitely not publicized.

    I would rather see an animal get a loving home under less than perfect circumstances than be put to sleep. Life is precious - and who are we to say that it is better for an animal to be put down than to live with someone who cannot afford expensive vet care?

    I don't think that paying more money for an animal results in them viewing a pet with any more value. That may be the case for purebred animals, but not your basic cats and dogs.

    However, I understand that Halo needs to make enough money to continue to provide the services it does, and in these circumstances they need to walk a fine line between making money and having animals lose their lives because someone could not afford the adoption fee.

    I just feel very strongly that animals have a fundamental right to life and that we need to put all our efforts into ensuring that they are not put down before we start being too picky in regards to who they are adopted out to.
  10. Kim Smith
    Monday, November 15, 2010
    As the 'go-to' person, unofficial dropoff point in my neighborhood, and independant rescuer, I quite understand the need for fees. Too many 'free kitten/puppies' are available for those with impulses who aren't thinking of 15+ possible years down the road. Reasonable fees are required to reduce that problem. But also educating the public about the true value of all lives..'oh, I want to show my kids the miracle of birth, then I'll just give away the..', or 'oh, cool, a puppy (of a certain in style breed). I'll look cool to my friend.' is just as important. When I find a good home for my thrown away cats/kittens, I don't expect to make any more than 10%, if that, of what I put into the animal-not including love. Bottlefeeding (when necessary), feeding, vetting, vaccinating, chipping, altering all add up. But the educating each of my families about the true nonfinancial I find pays well. And even if they're just windowshopping, just spreading the word in person of the overpopulation, inhumane treatment, b.y.b irresposiblity seems to, at least, raise some awareness.

  11. Cricketsmom
    Monday, January 17, 2011
    I feel that pet adoption fees should be paid but within reason. I adopted my cat Nikki from Halo at a time when I lived on a fixed income that barely above the poverty level. I always provided my pets with the care and the loved they needed and deserved. It upsets me that there are people who feel that adoption fees should be $300.00 or more. the reason I even adopted Nikki in the first place was number one my first cat had died, and number two the price for Nikki was cut to $45.00. So Nikki was on sale. I would not have been able to afford her if she was even $20.00 more but let me assure you Nikki's healthcare has always been provided (she always had insurance even when I didn't). Nikki also has had the best food (even when I didn't). Providing a good loving home is a huge responsibility but just because you are poor you shouldn't be priced out of it.

  12. Lori
    Saturday, January 29, 2011
    I understand why the fee is a lot to cover your cost but for myself I held off adopting another cat for over a year because I could not afford the adoption fees. I was lucky one day when I read in the paper that the Humane Society was having an adoption day and you could pay any amount you could afford. That day was a blessing and I now have a beautiful one year calico name Olivia who I love so much. Cats are not that expensive to own. She has the best food and medical care. Times are tough but I have saved for her medical just in case. Please consider more days like these because so many more people could adopt and more animals can be removed from the shelters.
  13. MAC
    Wednesday, March 02, 2011
    I think fees can be both good and bad. On the one hand, any money given to HALO is a good thing, as a Platinum Supporter for the last three years; I certainly agree that financial support is vital.
    However, if the fees are too high, it limits HALO’s ability to save as many animals as possible. I do not agree with the notion that unless you pay $300 in adoption fees, you are not ready to be a good owner of a pet. In fact, I think the opposite, I think not wanting to “waste” $300 plus on a fee, and instead setting those funds aside for pet care is the smarter route. Maybe people would get more pet insurance for the long term if they could reinvest the fees elsewhere, I know I would.
  14. Kate
    Monday, April 04, 2011
    Adoption fees are necessary to cover HALO's investment in the animal. I think they should be set at a level that allows HALO to continue to operate and help put animals in good homes. I agree with Emma's comment that a reasonable cost say around $200 or so acts as a screen which filters out potential adopters who can't really afford to properly care for the animal. I also strongly believe that people don't see a more expensive pet as a better pet.
  15. Tammy
    Wednesday, April 13, 2011
    I understand the need for adoption fees, even though, I have had 2 cats at separate times and never paid for any of them. Two of the cats were found as kittens on the streets. They were taken in and I'd loved and took better care of them than myself for all their lives. And, I was living paycheck to paycheck. One went into kidney failure at the end of her life and I would have exhausted all of my credit cards to save her. I loved her so much. Cats are inexpensive when compared to dogs and your financial situation has to be incredibly tight not to be able to take care of them, in my opinion. Unless it's their medical bills you're dealing with. My point is really you can have someone willing to shell out $300 or more for a pet and mistreat the pet entirely. I do know that by reducing the cost you will certainly be able to get more of them homes. It's a crap shoot. At least HALO lists the prices for adoption (although, I am in the market to adopt and still haven't gotten past having to pay a fee) unlike others adoption centers that I have emailed the question and adoption form and still have not gotten a response from them on what their fees are. Makes the establishment seem sketchy. Good luck with your decision.
  16. Jodi Ann Becker
    Thursday, May 12, 2011
    My Lizzie was adopted from Halo, and yes, I paid the hefty fee, but she WAS worth every penny. I had been looking for the "right" dog for 2 years, SHE was the ONE!
    We recently adopted another pup, from a different agency that provided pretty much the same things (microchip, vaccinations, and spay) but her adoption was a fraction of Lizzie's. I find it very odd.
    I think the higher fees sometimes can be a deterrent for some, I think it does help warrant families who will be able to provide the right care for these animals.
  17. SHARON MARTIN
    Friday, May 27, 2011
    I am saddened by the remarks that if you pay alot for an animal you will take better care of it. I adopted a shih tzu at a reasonable fee and found her to have kidney failure. I treated her for this disease for almost 5 years before I lost her, at a cost of around 10,000. dollars. I had the chance to trade her for another dog, but she was mine and I didn't want to give her up. You can not judge a person by how much money they will pay for a pet but by how much love they can give that pet. I think that the rescues should rely on private and corporate donations and use a sliding scale fee process for their adoptions. Many animals are missing out on a really good family because of high adoption rates.
  18. john
    Wednesday, October 05, 2011
    I think the majority of the HALO prices are too high, especially with the economy that way it is now. People, in general, are finding it hard to stay afloat let alone adopt a pet, even if they want to. Either name your price or reasonable fees not over $100.00 without the expensive stuff like the chip, especially on a puppy he/she shouldn't be left alone anyway to get lost. The chip can come when the pet is older and the owner can afford it. Good food and love that's all it takes.

    love - johnny bananas
  19. Maxine
    Tuesday, October 11, 2011
    Charging an adoption fee is understandable in order to cover the overhead costs but it should be reasonable. The question of what is reasonable certainly is debatable but the real issue is what is the buyer willing to spend on an adoption fee. Personally, I will not spend more than $75.00 on an adoption fee because I believe that if the rescue shelters are sincere and really care about the animals then they will make it possible for them to be easily and quickly adopted. That would mean making the fee affordable, especially during difficult economic times as these.
  20. Honey
    Tuesday, December 27, 2011
    All of these articles have saved me a lot of headaches.
  21. Adrienne
    Saturday, March 03, 2012
    I can definitely see the need for fees, but what about having a scholarship program for great pet parents who don't have that kind of money up front?
  22. Heather
    Friday, March 23, 2012
    I am all for the adoption fees, because I know the money goes for a wonderful cost into the facility and helping the other dogs at the shelter instead of going to euthanize dogs because they don't get adopted. I also agree with the high adoption fees because it stops the wrong type of people from adopting the dogs and decreases the rate of the dogs being put back into the shelter system. Having high fees also ensures that the pet owner is willing and able to pay the expenses that come along with being a responsible pet owner. If you pay the high expenses to adopt the dog you are more likely to take the responsibility seriously and take care of the dog as most people don't understand it is a lifelong commitment, not a commitment that when you get tired of it you get rid of it. Spending that much money on a pet prolongs the life of the dog in the household I believe. Honestly if you aren't willing to spend the money to adopt the dogs then you won't take it seriously and are probably in the wrong position financially at the time to adopt a pet and attend to all the financial needs that come along with owning a pet.
  23. Heather
    Friday, March 23, 2012
    I am all for the adoption fees, because I know the money goes for a wonderful cost into the facility and helping the other dogs at the shelter instead of going to euthanize dogs because they don't get adopted. I also agree with the high adoption fees because it stops the wrong type of people from adopting the dogs and decreases the rate of the dogs being put back into the shelter system. Having high fees also ensures that the pet owner is willing and able to pay the expenses that come along with being a responsible pet owner. If you pay the high expenses to adopt the dog you are more likely to take the responsibility seriously and take care of the dog as most people don't understand it is a lifelong commitment, not a commitment that when you get tired of it you get rid of it. Spending that much money on a pet prolongs the life of the dog in the household I believe. Honestly if you aren't willing to spend the money to adopt the dogs then you won't take it seriously and are probably in the wrong position financially at the time to adopt a pet and attend to all the financial needs that come along with owning a pet.

Comment on this post

Name:  
Website:
Comment:
 

Categories

Copyright 2009, HALO Animal Rescue. All Rights Reserved.