Question - Out of Curiosity.....

[QuickSilver]

<puts on lecture pants>

There are two ways that number could be misleading. First, we are looking for the % of people under thirty who have pets and give them up. What we have a stat for is, of the number of pets surrendered, how many belonged to people under thirty.

One quick way to look at this is to look at the breeds of dogs currently in shelters - this does not necessarily reflect the ratio of breeds out in the world.

Here's another way. Let's be optimistic and say that only 1% of people surrender their dogs. In that case, even if people < 30 surrender at almost twice the rate of people of people > 30, any given person < 30 with a pet is very unlikely to surrender.

Or this way. Let's say that people < 30 are much more likely to adopt dogs than people > 30. For the sake of example, let's be extreme, and say they are ten times more likely to adopt dogs. In that case, all other things being equal, people < 30 would be surrendering 10x as many dogs as everyone else. In that case, the fact that surrendered dogs were 2x as likely to be from a person < 30 would actually speak very well for the young'ns: it would show that as a group, they were LESS likely to surrender than older folks.

Not necessarily saying this is true, just that statistics are tricky. A great little read is "How to Lie With Statistics". Very eye opening (and short).

[red98vett]

Originally Posted by QuickSilver

Sorry, couldn't resist. Just for the record, red98vett didn't say that... at least, not on THIS thread.

HAHAHAHA You RAT ! I am SO glad you clarified I didn't say that !!

my eyes just went

ok - so WHAT if I posted photos of Chanel having her way with a gorilla (a TOY Gorilla in case anyone thought I was REALLY a pervert !) Actually I may have called my own self one in the past...

or one of you 'mean women' did.....but

For proof I never said my yorkie was a PERVERT - go here - post #88 http://www.yorkietalk.com/forums/yor...ts-name-6.html

Magilla is the perv.

I'm kind of glad you said that - the humping thread I just linked above is extremely funny ~!

ok.
I'm a perv.
I got it.

[Nancy1999]

Originally Posted by QuickSilver

<puts on lecture pants>

There are two ways that number could be misleading. First, we are looking for the % of people under thirty who have pets and give them up. What we have a stat for is, of the number of pets surrendered, how many belonged to people under thirty.

One quick way to look at this is to look at the breeds of dogs currently in shelters - this does not necessarily reflect the ratio of breeds out in the world.

Here's another way. Let's be optimistic and say that only 1% of people surrender their dogs. In that case, even if people < 30 surrender at almost twice the rate of people of people > 30, any given person < 30 with a pet is very unlikely to surrender.

Or this way. Let's say that people < 30 are much more likely to adopt dogs than people > 30. For the sake of example, let's be extreme, and say they are ten times more likely to adopt dogs. In that case, all other things being equal, people < 30 would be surrendering 10x as many dogs as everyone else. In that case, the fact that surrendered dogs were 2x as likely to be from a person < 30 would actually speak very well for the young'ns: it would show that as a group, they were LESS likely to surrender than older folks.

Not necessarily saying this is true, just that statistics are tricky. A great little read is "How to Lie With Statistics". Very eye opening (and short).

Actually, it's not easy at all to lie in statistics, but percentages are not really statistics. If you do a statistical test on percentages, you get a statistic, and you can learn if the results are accurate with so many degrees of probability. People confuse percentages with statistics, but percentages do give us some indication of things, if we understand how the information was gathered. I agree with you it's very easy to mislead people with percentages, that’s why you have to know where the information is coming from, or if the group has an agenda.

As I commented on another thread the stats in this case do not imply that most people under 30 year old relinquish their pets, the stats only indicate that people under thirty are the most likely to relinquish their pets. Anytime a number is over 50% you can use the word "most." At 62% you can use the word most. But you cannot make sweeping generalizations that this is true everywhere, unless you really read the facts on the study and how it was taken.

[livingdustmops]

I could be wrong but I assumed (I know...I know) that the question was asked how old the people were that dumped their animals at the shelter and of the number dumped 62% of the people were under 30.

I worked for a car manufacturer...haha I understand how marketing people can take information and twist it....

[QuickSilver]

Originally Posted by red98vett

<snip>... my yorkie ... <snip>... is ... <snip> ... a perv.

Be careful what you say! Ha ha, okay, I'm just being evil, red98vett's dog is a total cutie, it's not her fault she's been hypnotized by the raw sex appeal of a toy gorilla.

livingdustmops, I assumed that as well - it's just that that doesn't mean that 62% of people under thirty dump their dogs.

Amazon.com: How to Lie with Statistics...
Still a classic.

[Nancy1999]

Originally Posted by livingdustmops

I could be wrong but I assumed (I know...I know) that the question was asked how old the people were that dumped their animals at the shelter and of the number dumped 62% of the people were under 30.

I worked for a car manufacturer...haha I understand how marketing people can take information and twist it....

Right, that's why it's always important to know the agenda of someone giving the percentage. A real scientist would catch holly heck for using them inappropriately, and most (over 50% ) scientists do care about their reputation. You could, for example, also say that their study indicated most of the people who turned dogs over to rescues had a high school education. Does this mean you shouldn't place home with people who've had a high school education or that you would be better off placing them with people who hadn't graduated high school? Of course not, it just means that most of the people turning a dog over to rescue had graduated high school. It's the interpretation of percentages, that misleads most people.

By the way, I really wish they taught statistics in high school for everyone, I think people would be so much harder to trick.

[livingdustmops]

Originally Posted by QuickSilver

Be careful what you say! Ha ha, okay, I'm just being evil, red98vett's dog is a total cutie, it's not her fault she's been hypnotized by the raw sex appeal of a toy gorilla.

livingdustmops, I assumed that as well - it's just that that doesn't mean that 62% of people under thirty dump their dogs.

Amazon.com: How to Lie with Statistics (9780393310726): Darrell Huff, Irving Geis: Books

Still a classic.

Out of the 100 (just to make it easier to understand) people who dumped their dogs in this study 62 of them were under 30 and 38 were over 30.

[QuickSilver]

Originally Posted by Nancy1999

You could, for example, also say that their study indicated most of the people who turned dogs over to rescues had a high school education. Does this mean you shouldn't place home with people who've had a high school education or that you would be better off placing them with people who hadn't graduated high school? Of course not, it just means that most of the people turning a dog over to rescue had graduated high school.

[Britster]

Originally Posted by livingdustmops

********************

Excellent information and I am a big believer in stats...I have watched people on YT give their opinions on many things in rescue without looking at the total picture but I believe many people on YT have been turned down because of age.

It is a known fact that Yorkies do not always like children...not all but generally speaking it is a view of the breed, Yorkies are very difficult to housebreak, Yorkies are companion animals and need attention and the list could go on.

So a 20 year old comes to rescue and wants a "baby"...the odds are this persons life is going to change radically in the next 5 to 10 years (travel, dating, husband and children) and many of these life changes do not work well with Yorkies and a number of Yorkies are turned into rescue because of no time, house breaking issues and they are nipping the children.

The amazing thing to me is that I never considered getting a dog at 20...I was having to much fun and certainly do not want the responsibility of a dog or picking up dog poop. I also do not have $$$ to take care of a dog. I so wish young people would think out their lives a little longer than what is going on the next day and stop being selfish with an animals life - 62% turned into shelters/rescue.

I realize some young people can handle it but come on, 62% can't and I really wonder what was in the breeders heads who placed these dogs.

I do agree that MOST young people would NOT be able to care for a dog. I am 20 years old this year and got Jackson in December 2008 at 18 years old. It was the BEST decision I ever could have made. Yes, I am young but clearly this dog is the love of my life and not just some puppy I thought was cute and passed it on to my parents to handle. Jackson is my full responsibility, my best friend, my buddy, my pal, I train with him every day, we're hardly ever apart, we spend many days and hours at the dog park, we walk nearly every day. He's truly my pal and I could NEVER part with him ever. He is my first "child" or my first love, whatever you wanna call it. He's my boy and nothing will ever change that. Yes, I am most likely going to get married, have kids, have a different career within the next 10-15 years but Jackson is guaranteed to ALWAYS be a big part of that. I could never disclude him from my life, he means the world to me. However, I think that when most people see my applications I've filled out for dogs in the past, they immediately skip past it because of my age yet I would give another dog a WONDERFUL loving home. When I was looking for a second dog through rescue, over 95% of people I emailed never even responded to an application OR email I sent about a specific dog. I would send a long detailed email describing me and Jackson, our life, what we do, if that dog would fit in, etc.

I do totally agree that most people my age would in no way or form be responsible to own a dog. None of my friends would. I put a lot of time into this dog but he's all worth it to me. So I do totally understand why rescues have to be strict with this. I just wish it was looked upon more as a case by case basis thing, but a few yorkie rescues I've seen are "must be 25 years old" etc. Alot of people are married and may already have a child before they're 25 so sometimes I think that's really unfair to just make that a staple rule. I know a ton of adults in their 30's who don't treat their dogs half as good as I treat Jackson at 19 years old.

[katy-yorkie]

My daughter is under 30 and within the last got her first dog. It's a dachshund. She loves that dog with all of her life. As a family we had dogs and cats through the years but never one that she was truly responsible for. She is the sole caretaker of her dog. I can't believe the time and care she puts into her baby. She would not part with her for anything. She got her dog from a shelter but you would think this dog is the queen of the world. It is queen in her world and that is what counts. Like Brit & Jackson, this dog is her her world. She walks her dog every day (bad weather stops her), takes her to dog parks and is with her every minute except when she is at work.

I sometimes feel guilty for buying mine especially since they came from a broker. Before YT, I had no idea about bad breeders, BYB or brokers. I knew about puppy mills and pet stores but had no idea about the brokers. If and I will, get another dog, hopefully it will be another Yorkie, it will be a rescue. I would love to save them all but I can't. But if I can save one or two (or as many as I can without being a hoarder) I will be happy. I think the $300 or whatever fee is necessary to pay the rescue will be the best money I will spend.

[livingdustmops]

Originally Posted by Britster

I do agree that MOST young people would NOT be able to care for a dog. I am 20 years old this year and got Jackson in December 2008 at 18 years old. It was the BEST decision I ever could have made. Yes, I am young but clearly this dog is the love of my life and not just some puppy I thought was cute and passed it on to my parents to handle. Jackson is my full responsibility, my best friend, my buddy, my pal, I train with him every day, we're hardly ever apart, we spend many days and hours at the dog park, we walk nearly every day. He's truly my pal and I could NEVER part with him ever. He is my first "child" or my first love, whatever you wanna call it. He's my boy and nothing will ever change that. Yes, I am most likely going to get married, have kids, have a different career within the next 10-15 years but Jackson is guaranteed to ALWAYS be a big part of that. I could never disclude him from my life, he means the world to me. However, I think that when most people see my applications I've filled out for dogs in the past, they immediately skip past it because of my age yet I would give another dog a WONDERFUL loving home. When I was looking for a second dog through rescue, over 95% of people I emailed never even responded to an application OR email I sent about a specific dog. I would send a long detailed email describing me and Jackson, our life, what we do, if that dog would fit in, etc.

I do totally agree that most people my age would in no way or form be responsible to own a dog. None of my friends would. I put a lot of time into this dog but he's all worth it to me. So I do totally understand why rescues have to be strict with this. I just wish it was looked upon more as a case by case basis thing, but a few yorkie rescues I've seen are "must be 25 years old" etc. Alot of people are married and may already have a child before they're 25 so sometimes I think that's really unfair to just make that a staple rule. I know a ton of adults in their 30's who don't treat their dogs half as good as I treat Jackson at 19 years old.

I am glad you understand..most young people would not...and that is the problem. It is more about me then about the dog in a lot of cases. When I was doing rescue we placed a couple of dogs with young people because they proved how dedicated they were by writing/talking to us about why they would make a great furparent even though it was out of the norm of who we would adopt to.

[MaddiesMommie]

Britster, I know you are an excellent mommy to Jackson so this is no way directed toward you.

I do understand though why rescues would be discouraged at the thought of giving a dog to someone as young as you. I think most people in their late teens and early twenties will experience major changes over the next 5-6 years. Plans change, people get married, some move, or go off to college and sometimes a dog doesnt fit into the new plan.

I had NO intention of getting married at 20 and moving to Johnson City to live in an apt with my high school sweetie. But I did. I know there are the exceptions, a few young members here are excellent furparents. But when placing a dog that may have already come from an unstable situation, a rescuer has to ask themselves is it worth the risk.

[Britster]

Originally Posted by MaddiesMommie

Britster, I know you are an excellent mommy to Jackson so this is no way directed toward you.

I do understand though why rescues would be discouraged at the thought of giving a dog to someone as young as you. I think most people in their late teens and early twenties will experience major changes over the next 5-6 years. Plans change, people get married, some move, or go off to college and sometimes a dog doesnt fit into the new plan.

I had NO intention of getting married at 20 and moving to Johnson City to live in an apt with my high school sweetie. But I did. I know there are the exceptions, a few young members here are excellent furparents. But when placing a dog that may have already come from an unstable situation, a rescuer has to ask themselves is it worth the risk.

No I do totally understand! My circumstances are different than most, I'm not really your typical 19 year old, so for me... having a dog is perfect. One of my best friends could NEVER be responsible for a dog, she's more of a partyer and out all the time, would never be into walking a dog or even have the money to provide it food, etc. In my case, I'm not a big spender (well, I spend alot on computers and cameras etc lol) so spending money on a dog is more important to me, whereas she would rather use it for beer money, ya know?

So I do understand why rescues would be unsure! They are just doing their job and trying to place an animal in their FOREVER home so when adopting a dog out to a 19 year old with their whole lives ahead of them, I know that would be tough to trust they will keep the dog, etc. I agree, most of the time it's probably not the worth the risk.

But the sad side of this is... when I go to get a 2nd dog, it will probably end up not being thru rescue simply because of my age. Therefore another dog is sitting in a shelter or foster home waiting for a home that I could give a great one to but I am gonna have to buy a dog, and the cycle continues. Or I would try and go to our kill shelter here. I see yorkies there all the time and I know those places aren't as strict so while that is not good all the time, it may work in my case.