During the Q&A portion of a recent startup event, I was asked whether Rentcycle could be used to "rent a monkey." This question brought laughter to the audience and caught me off-guard. As soon as I got home, I Googled "rent a monkey," only to discover a viral online hoax that promised the ability to rent a monkey for a week. If you're bored, the video is pretty funny. At first, I dismissed the whole thing as a joke. But scrolling further down the results page led me to find you actually CAN rent a monkey—professionally trained monkeys with handlers for children's birthday parties. I soon learned monkey rentals are the tip of the iceberg for a new global trend—pet rentals—a topic that's been met with much controversy in the U.S.
Pet rentals have been around for years, particularly in Asia. Korea and Japan are famous for their cat cafés, local coffee shops where patrons pay a fee to cuddle with kittens while enjoying their daily cup-a-joe. An article in Marie Claire states, "The cat cafés have become so popular that more than 150 businesses have sprung up to offer animals for hire—ferrets, turtles, squirrels, monkeys—on an hourly, weekly, or even monthly basis, if you want to bring the critter home." Dogs have been predictably popular, as evidenced by Tokyo dog rental business, Perro Moco. Here, busy professionals living in the cramped city of Tokyo can spend a few hours or a weekend with a furry friend of their choice.Temporary pet sharing seems to benefit both sides of the equation. Humans get companionship without the long-term responsibility and daily hassles associated with ownership. In turn, pets get the love and attention they seek. Since most pets are rescued from pounds, shelters or abandoned homes, they get a new lease on life, along with some much needed care.
This was precisely the motivation behind a U.S.-based company, FlexPetz which introduced dog rentals to cities across America. Despite annual fees of about $1,500 per year, the concept was extremely popular—there was even a waiting list to get selected! FlexPetz made the whole process very convenient—dogs were delivered groomed with pre-packaged meals; owners didn’t need to worry about veterinary bills or buying lots of toys. For obvious reasons, the service was perfect for people who travel a lot, people who live in places that don’t allow pets, and people who want to test if they’re ready for the commitment of owning an animal. Even nursing homes were great candidates for the pet rental service, with weekly scheduled dog visits for residents.Although this arrangement sounds ideal, FlexPetz didn’t go over so well in other cities, like London and Boston. Here, lawmakers and activists took action against pet rental companies, citing the practice as “unethical.” They argued services like FlexPetz promoted the idea of “disposable pets.” Activists from PETA and the ASPCA also got involved, arguing dog renting provides unstable environments for the animals. Since they’re pack animals, the ASPCA argues an inconsistent lifestyle like this can be psychologically traumatizing for the dogs. As one PETA rep stated, "This business exists to make money at the psychological expense of the animal. Besides the possibility of emotional scarring from being bounced from owner to owner, there are concerns about the rental dogs as they age—where do they go when their shelf life expires?" After only a year in business, FlexPetz was forced to shut its doors in 2008, in response to the backlash.
I’m not quite sure where I stand in this debate. I certainly agree with The Humane Society that "animals are not DVDs," but feel, if handled appropriately, there's an opportunity for some kind of solution when it comes to temporary pet sharing. A dog owner myself, of course I’m a proponent of animal rights and the ethical treatment of our four-legged friends. However, the rigorous screening process (background checks, matching process, in-home interviews, trial sessions) practiced by FlexPetz eliminated many of these concerns for me. On top of this, the FlexPetz dogs were rescued from pounds and would have otherwise been euthanized. Seemed these dogs got a chance at a happy life while the people (who were willing to sit for months on a waitlist and spend upwards of $1,500 per year) got an opportunity for companionship. It can be argued that, in many ways, the decision to rent a dog is much more responsible than the decision to own a dog since it acknowledges the time commitment, responsibility and investment of ownership. Although pet renting is controversial, I can’t help but feel the world would be a better place with more opportunities to interact with puppies and kittens :-)
Do you think there's an appropriate and responsible way to handle pet sharing? Would love to hear what you think.
