OK, Spot , lets put a different take on that one shall we.

We all agree there are far to many dogs needing homes , and not enough spaces in rescue for all the abandoned dogs..

Lets say "a" rescue has space for 5 dogs, and 7 are at the pound, two of them are what you may call "hard to re home" what does the rescue do, take those two, and leave 2 that may be easily re-homed.. if they take those 2 and leave the other 2, their fate is sealed, yet the 2 that the rescue know will be with them for mths maybe yrs , will fill up a pen.. is it far on the dogs that they wont be able to take in the future because these two are long term tenants.. and more to the point is it far on the dogs themselves to be (what do they call them) "sticky dogs" because no one wants them.

Is it not better for those dogs to be PTS , so the rescue can give others dogs a chance.

They cant all be saved, someone has to make a choice, so not sure why you are so miffed at Rips point, as it s fact sadly

It's very possible a black mutt died because you and everyone else goes for the pretty ones, does anyone ever think about that?

Also it was this rather sweeping statement from Rips (who it appears rescues can do not a thing right) and are the root of all evil.

Yes I can see what you are saying but to say rescues dont 'bother'. However many rescues will make that choice purely on the fact that the easily rehome will hopefully get rehomed from the pounds they do (as Shona does) take the difficult ones, the ugly ones, and as I said work bloody hard to get every dog they can out of a pts situation where possible. It is not that they cant be bothered! What on earth are the oldies club doing then?

To say they are not bothered really does beggar belief when I know right now there are around 20 volunteers out on the road transporting dogs from pts situations to places of safety without even thinking that dog is to ugly to rehome. Lets face an ugly dog to some is the most gorgeous dog in the world to others.

Although I suppose according to Rips its the rescues who are causing the problem anyway.

And now Im off to curl up with my ugly rescues, think about all those puppy farmers Ive help out by taking them, and watch extra time! Come on you scousers

Im sure other folk on here have the tv channel - Animal Planet? A few months ago they showed a team that went to Mexico to shelters there to "save" some dogs and bring back for rehoming to the US. It was smaller dogs they were choosing and all what I would term as "pretty", long haired and fluffy. The plainer smooth haired dogs were left. I found this dreadfully sad. When I mentioned it on another forum I go to, I was told that the reason for this is that it is better to save dogs that "appeal" and will almost certainly be guaranteed homes.....

Its peoples attitude that need to change. There are numerous folk with black purebred dogs so why I wonder are the dark coloured dogs passed over. It might be interesting for someone to carry out a study and find out why that is......

Really - whatever makes you think that?

What? apart from the bold, red type you have now started using?

Still dont buy that. The ONLY dog I know of that ended up in a puppy farm type situation (Labrador) was bought by the breeder (PF) who advertised in the same newspaper as the (owners) did. The dog would of been back at the breeders like a shot but the OWNER wasnt prepared to wait 4 days until the breeder returned from holiday, the person looking after their dogs couldnt of course make such a decision by themselves.

Perhaps you need to look at owners as well as breeders.

I have the same breed as DD and I can be 100% sure that none of my breeding woulld be rehomed via a rescue centre. I am a Breeder and show my dogs. I have been breeding for over 25years and know 100% that not one of my breeding has ended up in a rescue centre in all those years. If by chance one had to then I would know about it asap as being involved in the Show World helps imo as other breeders keep an eye out. So I am one breeder who does not add to the rescue situation

Hold on now, i never ran breeders down, all i said was that an unsuspecting reputable breeder was "conned" in the first place, that isnt running breeders down! Youve misunderstood my theory entirely.

Of course there are bad owners, good grief the reasons they
give for giving dogs up are unbelievable at times. As i have said we live in a throw away society, when they decide they want "rid" no matter how much they paid for a pup originally, it goes without a thought or worse theyre banished to a kennel/shed at the top of the garden. Some get dumped to fend for themselves or dumped in the pound. The luckier ones end up in a no-kill shelter or in the case of a purebed (sometimes) with breed rescue.

As sad as it sounds that is why they are choosing them dogs, the rescuers have to be kind of heartless, the phrase cruel to be kind springs to mind, as when they are looking at dogs to rescue they do have to look for the ones that can be rehomed over the ones that need help, but wouldn't be so rehomeable, the reason I'm afraid is simple, if they take the dogs that would take longer to find homes they wouldn't be able to rescue so many dogs so regulary, so by rescueing the more desirable dogs they can save more lives, which in the long run is a better thing for the masses, but not so much the individuals, but they can only do what they can, and they are doing a great thing for the dogs they can help.

I know folk in breed rescue who trawl the free ads & publications like you mention to stop dogs like this poor lab ending up in the likes of puppy farms. In some cases they 'buy' the dog. Sadly labs like a lot of breeds are too popular for
their own good.

Its shocking that poor dog ended up with a p.f. To all intents & purposes the lab breeder did all the right vetting when placing his pup & then this happened,
he/she must have been devastated

This situation you mention bears out what i keep saying, we live in a throw away society.........