View attachment 1457687
Interesting. And a little way down the list so have been following for a short while at least.
I'm going to be a bit controversial here, but I do see where they are coming from with their copy and paste responses. Like any rehoming charity, they only have the information that re-homers give them and if it ticks their boxes they'll give them animals. It's an incredibly hard situation, they want to re-home those animals and if someone is good enough by their standards then there's little argument you can make against it. They aren't going to stop her having chickens because Tattle said she doesn't walk the dog - they'll just argue the standard line that you don't see her every waking moment so how do you know.
I know our side of that so don't come at me but I'm just being a bit devils advocate and providing the other side of it. They won't refuse to give her hens based on tenuous evidence (because it is that at the end of the day - we
don't have
concrete proof that the dog doesn't get walked), that's just the hard truth.
Like I said, don't come at me, I'm on Tattles side. It's just screaming into the void to try and get any company or charity to change their minds based on having little proper proof of what we know is true.