« Sometimes, the truth works best | Main | Aaaaaaahhhhhh… »

Pimping Pets

halloween-doggie061027.jpgAnyone ever heard of a company called FlexPetz? It’s in the business of renting out dogs and cats to people who want the companionship in the short term; clients pay $300 plus $50 a month (as well as an additional charge when a pet is rented) for the right to borrow a pet from FlexPetz for a few weeks or months. Screening is done, the pets aren’t kept in kennels and, presumably, the service brings a lot of happiness to the clients, some of whom even ultimately adopt a pet. There are several branches nationwide, but FlexPetz’s attempts to open up an office in Boston have hit a snag.

Several state legislators have filed a piece of legislation attempting to ban the business of renting dogs and cats. Why?

Ray McSoley, owner of Animal Behavior Associates in Westwood, said, “I have no problem with ambassador dogs at hotels, but renting a dog is a four-legged escort service. It devalues all parties. It promotes the whole concept of no commitment. They take the most adoptable dogs out of a shelter, suck all the positive energy out of them for two years, then put them up for adoption. It’s a horrible idea.”

Valid?

| Comments (9)


Comments

"...suck all the positive energy out of them for two years, then put them up for adoption. It's a horrible idea"

Sounds like business school.

Ha! I was gonna say, if you made that "three years," it would be just like law school! Well played, Kip...

If it keeps animals out of shelters for a while (even permanently, in some cases), then I'm fine with it. Although I do find it funny that people pay that kind of money to basically foster animals, which is something they can do for free through a lot of shelters. They're only paying for the right to choose which animal they want to "borrow".

As long as they don't do the same with the pets as they do with escorts, I'm kind of eh.

Is that dog in a corset? It IS an escort service!

They are using these animals as commodities instead of treating them as living creatures. I gotta concur with Mr. McSoley.

I don't know Andre, there is already a pretty big market for particular breeds of animal out there. I'm not sure this is any different. And Lisa is right on the money, if the suckers want to pay for this, then let them.

I do, however, think that there are probably bigger problems out there that the state legislature could focus on...

I used to volunteer at a shelter, and I saw that many people get puppies and then don't want them anymore when they are grown.
Those people are doing the same thing to the dogs, at least this agency is being honest about it.

The article says that all of the dogs that are taken out of shelters are adopted after a few years and that the owner of the business has pledged that she "will not euthanize" any of the dogs in her company's care. Sounds to me like they'll be saving a lot of lives and tax money. Kudos to them for thinking up a way to save more animals!