"In depth research into prospective owners"

Can I ask how you would approach this? How would you fund it? What would your criteria be?

rune

So what you have written makes me very likely to rehome my dogs simply because I do not believe in blanket neutering of dogs at any age.

What irks me about certain rescues is that they set a fixed sale price for their dogs based on breed-Crossbreeds always being cheaper than a recognizible breed of dog, which are often sold by rescues at the going rate for a puppy of the same breed.

You state that breeders cannot make guarentees about the puppies they breed any more than a rescue can-really ? So I cannot guarentee that anyone who gets one of my Keewee's puppies will get a puppy that will not have TNS/CL/MDR 1/CEA(CH) can't I & that getting a puppy/adult collie from a rescue from unknown background will have the same chance of having these conditions ? Sorry you are so very very wrong, my Keewee has been tested & does not have any of these conditions-nor does she carry the genes for them-so her puppies cannot develop them & as I intend to use a genetically nornal dog on her, her puppies will not carry the condition either. Her puppies will be BAER tested as well so no one will get a deaf puppy from her either as I would keep any deaf puppy she might have. Breeders cannot guarentee that puppies will not have HD/ED/epilepsy yet as the inheritance/cause of these conditions is not known-but as she comes from generations of dogs who do not have high HD scores/ED/Epilepsy it is far more unlikely that her puppies will have these conditions either. Would a dog from a rescue have the same starting chances ? I think not.

I seriously worry that some rescues do not do enough in depth research into prospective owners as they have a high a lot of bounce back dogs that should not have gone it to purely pet homes in the first place.(the deaf puppy collie at MT for example)

I've probably worked with rescue longer than most people on this forum have been alive, staring when my parents did in the mid 1950s. I've worked retraining rescue dogs since the mid 1960s. As for the excuses people give I've only truly believed 2-one the owners daughter was allergic(medical evidence seen)to the puppies dander & a lovely man, whose wife had died suddenly, whose working hours made it impossible for him to look after his bitch probably & who was genuinely heart broken when he let her go. All the rest(probably 1,000s)simply wanted rid of their dog.

I have no problem with rescue dogs being neutered, but not before they are post pubescence, however I do not see why someone who wants to have a rescue dog should have to have ALL their other dogs neutered-after all the rescue can not be used for breeding if it is neutered

So what you have written makes me very likely to rehome my dogs simply because I do not believe in blanket neutering of dogs at any age.

What irks me about certain rescues is that they set a fixed sale price for their dogs based on breed-Crossbreeds always being cheaper than a recognizible breed of dog, which are often sold by rescues at the going rate for a puppy of the same breed.

You state that breeders cannot make guarentees about the puppies they breed any more than a rescue can-really ? So I cannot guarentee that anyone who gets one of my Keewee's puppies will get a puppy that will not have TNS/CL/MDR 1/CEA(CH) can't I & that getting a puppy/adult collie from a rescue from unknown background will have the same chance of having these conditions ? Sorry you are so very very wrong, my Keewee has been tested & does not have any of these conditions-nor does she carry the genes for them-so her puppies cannot develop them & as I intend to use a genetically nornal dog on her, her puppies will not carry the condition either. Her puppies will be BAER tested as well so no one will get a deaf puppy from her either as I would keep any deaf puppy she might have. Breeders cannot guarentee that puppies will not have HD/ED/epilepsy yet as the inheritance/cause of these conditions is not known-but as she comes from generations of dogs who do not have high HD scores/ED/Epilepsy it is far more unlikely that her puppies will have these conditions either. Would a dog from a rescue have the same starting chances ? I think not.

I seriously worry that some rescues do not do enough in depth research into prospective owners as they have a high a lot of bounce back dogs that should not have gone it to purely pet homes in the first place.(the deaf puppy collie at MT for example)I've probably worked with rescue longer than most people on this forum have been alive, staring when my parents did in the mid 1950s. I've worked retraining rescue dogs since the mid 1960s. As for the excuses people give I've only truly believed 2-one the owners daughter was allergic(medical evidence seen)to the puppies dander & a lovely man, whose wife had died suddenly, whose working hours made it impossible for him to look after his bitch probably & who was genuinely heart broken when he let her go. All the rest(probably 1,000s)simply wanted rid of their dog.

I have no problem with rescue dogs being neutered, but not before they are post pubescence, however I do not see why someone who wants to have a rescue dog should have to have ALL their other dogs neutered-after all the rescue can not be used for breeding if it is neutered

where exactly did I say that?
What I am getting at is that just because someone responsible doesnt want to neuter their dog having done all the right research and made an educated choice, does not then mean that rescues can knowingly make that same choice when they rehome, with the best research and will in the world we can check out a prospective new home, but people can and do lie and show you what you want to see, and you cannot guarantee that if you dont neuter the dog that it may not end up pregnant or sire to pups. We will not and cannot take that chance, especially with staffies,.

As to the comments regarding the guarantee, my point is that noone can 100% guarantee any dog be that temperament or pedigree or what it will turn out like ultimately so why shouldnt rescues charge a fee just as a breeder does.

A rescue dog shouldnt be a "cheap" dog it should simply be a dog thats wanted.

Rescues often get pedigree dogs in they dont then charge a higher fee for them( or certainly we dont) so no one is actually paying for the dog as such, they are paying a donation to the rescue for the work that they do.

So an 8 week old puppy can sire puppies, this is why a lot of rescues castrate at 8 weeks ???

So you think that Breeders"fees"are the same as the running costs for a rescue then ?? Gosh so take into account the cost of all the health testing I have had done on all my dogs, their vets fees for treatment(not that mine visit the vets much), the cost of keeping my dogs throughout their lives, maintaining my vehicle/premises etc etc as a rescue has to. I've already done over £2,500 on health testing alone.

One rescue(breed specific)I work with charges a set amount for their dogs to defray the kennelling fees, vets fees etc as well as expecting a donation fron the owner giving up the dog(this can be waived for cases were the main thing is to get the dogs out of their situation), the other asks for a donation(no set amount)for their dogs as they have their own kennelling(bulit by donations raised by individuals, breed clubs & Obedience people)so their day to day costs are much lower.

I think at times a lot of people involved in rescue see ALL Breeders as the cause of their problems-they aren't the vast majority of dogs that go into rescue are not pedigree dogs nor are they KC(or any other register)registered, they are the result of being bred for money by puppy farmers, BYB & pet owners & then sold on without care. I know for certain that this is the case for GSDs.I have always spayed my bitches after they have had their puppies or if they are not going to be bred from as the pros outweigh the cons for them medically, the same cannot be said for dogs at this time.

.

If you work with rescue you shouldn't need to ask this question. Why should it cost money ? Plenty of research can be done for free or little cost.

Criteria for what ?

So an 8 week old puppy can sire puppies, this is why a lot of rescues castrate at 8 weeks ???

So you think that Breeders"fees"are the same as the running costs for a rescue then ?? Gosh so take into account the cost of all the health testing I have had done on all my dogs, their vets fees for treatment(not that mine visit the vets much), the cost of keeping my dogs throughout their lives, maintaining my vehicle/premises etc etc as a rescue has to. I've already done over £2,500 on health testing alone.

One rescue(breed specific)I work with charges a set amount for their dogs to defray the kennelling fees, vets fees etc as well as expecting a donation fron the owner giving up the dog(this can be waived for cases were the main thing is to get the dogs out of their situation), the other asks for a donation(no set amount)for their dogs as they have their own kennelling(bulit by donations raised by individuals, breed clubs & Obedience people)so their day to day costs are much lower.

I think at times a lot of people involved in rescue see ALL Breeders as the cause of their problems-they aren't the vast majority of dogs that go into rescue are not pedigree dogs nor are they KC(or any other register)registered, they are the result of being bred for money by puppy farmers, BYB & pet owners & then sold on without care. I know for certain that this is the case for GSDs.

I have always spayed my bitches after they have had their puppies or if they are not going to be bred from as the pros outweigh the cons for them medically, the same cannot be said for dogs at this time.

Azz, sorry but the whole fundraising thing is a huge issue, we couldnt possibly rely on the new owners doing a sponsored walk as the basis of their payment, we have huge costs, kenneling fees, medical bills, advertising etc and as \greyhound says the adoption fee barely covers that.

We charge a fair adoption fee, yet you still get the odd person asking to pay it up !! ( which we dont allow for obvious reasons)

Ultimately some people do see rescue dogs as the "cheap" option of getting hold of a breed they want, and will say anything to get that dog, therefore we must neuter the dogs to ensure that if for any reason that dog did end up in a situation less desirable ( which lets face it does occasionally happen) then at least it cant breed or be bred from to add to the problem'

Bearing in mind I am talking about staffies predominantly we just cannot take the fate of the 20 +staffies PTS every single day down to just having nowhere to go as people dont want staffies. Its that simple, how many times have we heard on here people coming on saying which breed would suit me ... I will have anything BUT a staffie.

We simply MUST neuter every dog as part of the problem with staffies is the overbreeding ( many from pretty bad example of the breed also), and just the vast quantities in rescue and being dumped daily.

I am sorry but I cant trust anyone who wont neuter their staffie yet claims to understand the problem they face presently. ( as per Rips post!)

Sal, I am not by any means saying that if you own a unneutered dog that you are irresponsible, moreso that for the MAJORITY who do, how many of them are making a conscious researched decision like you are/have and understand the risks that you then face with unneutered dogs in park etc, dogs in season and prepared to deal with that, and how many just havent bothered to get their dog done ( or the classic male response which tends to fall under " I am not getting his bits off")

I have to go along the lines of most people dont consider it, we on dogsey are the minority it seems not the majority !

Or certainly in my experience on what we get into rescue we are.

I wish I had a dogsey home for every dog we get in, we would rehome alot more.

Our dogs are just not moving at the moment, people just dont want staffies, and those that do are the ones we dont want to give to them.

Some great points in this thread guys - on both sides.

I can't say I know the answers, but do think things are not working quite as well as they could be - perhaps by people saying why rescues put them off might help in fine-tuning things? Surely feedback is always good?



Danni, I don't know the answers - I can just give you my feedback and come up with suggestions that I think might serve you better. I don't think there's any good in 'arguing' our opposite sides either, but as two parties in a 'transaction' we need to look at what the other is not happy about - otherwise it's a stalemate and that won't do the dogs any good.

Charging people

Why not trial something like this. Get a £100 deposit and let the adopters know that you run a scheme where all adopters agree to do a sponsored walk with their new dog - and so long as you raise more than £100 you get the deposit back. You could do it online so people make donations directly to you.

Why? How many people will exceed £100? How many people will say please keep the deposit as well? It's a win win in my view. Either way you get the needed money, people don't feel like they are 'buying' the dog and chances are you could end up with double

I'm not sure what the answer is to the vetting procedure or neutering - but, as a rescue it is in your own best interest to find out what is putting people off, and what you can do to change that, whilst trying to keep in mind the problems you foresee, and maybe seeing how you can get that message across too.

The main thing that would put me off personally, is the insistence of neutering a male dog. And while I don't like the idea of a rescue being a 'transaction' or having to be 'judged' by a homecheck I could live with it - for the sake of the dog.

I think overall, at the mo, for most people, rescuing doesn't really feel like rescuing. Personally I would think the most important thing is finding a good, forever home for a dog - every thing else comes after that. But that's my opinion and I'd be the first to agree I may not be getting things from the rescues point of view (although I think I have tried to).