Dew Claws??

[Danefied]

I don't want to see S/N legislated, but that doesn't mean I don't encourage the average pet owner to surgically sterilize. The reality is there are still WAY too many people who get sucked in to that "just one litter" mentality with their pet, and had that pet been adopted out already altered it solves that pesky issue right off the bat.

Where we live there is no dog licensing, let alone S/N requirements.
I am a responsible dog owner, I am perfectly capable of keeping my dogs from breeding, but all of mine are speutered for my peace of mind, their peace of mind, and for the example they set.

 

[dachshunds4me]

We're not seeing a ton of doodles (some, not all) but think of it - all those millers sell to people who don't spay/neuter, and then you have those dogs walking around.
You can't just pin it on one population.
I mean - check Petfinder. Look at how many are purebreds and not even a "fad" breed?

My husband just brought home "Princess", a little Chihuahua - pretty little girl - surrendered yesterday - in labor - when her owner couldn't afford a c-section.
Her one puppy died. First heat, she's not even 1yr. of age.
I don't even know if they planned this or just didn't keep her locked up.
These aren't responsible owners - for anyone who really thinks they are, go to the shelter, volunteer. Hell, volunteer for a rescue.
You will revise your beliefs.

 

[Upendi&Mina]

We're not seeing a ton of doodles (some, not all) but think of it - all those millers sell to people who don't spay/neuter, and then you have those dogs walking around.
You can't just pin it on one population.
I mean - check Petfinder. Look at how many are purebreds and not even a "fad" breed?

My husband just brought home "Princess", a little Chihuahua - pretty little girl - surrendered yesterday - in labor - when her owner couldn't afford a c-section.
Her one puppy died. First heat, she's not even 1yr. of age.
I don't even know if they planned this or just didn't keep her locked up.
These aren't responsible owners - for anyone who really thinks they are, go to the shelter, volunteer. Hell, volunteer for a rescue.
You will revise your beliefs.

I do volunteer for my local shelter and I know many others here who volunteer aswell. I STILL don't agree with pediatric s/n, I think assuming that all of us only hold the opinion that we do because we are uneducated is a bit insulting.

 

[Picklepaige]

Back when my shelter had the "wait until they are older and bring them back" policy, I know several people who did not, and the shelter ended up with their puppies. We have too high a turnover rate to do any kind of screening, so anyone gets a dog.

If we are adopting those animals out intact, what good are we doing? After all, as I have mentioned earlier, 75% of the dogs we get in are under eight weeks old, indicating that we have a true overpopulation problem, rather than the owner retention problem that many members here talk about.

 

[dachshunds4me]

Back when my shelter had the "wait until they are older and bring them back" policy, I know several people who did not, and the shelter ended up with their puppies. We have too high a turnover rate to do any kind of screening, so anyone gets a dog.

If we are adopting those animals out intact, what good are we doing? After all, as I have mentioned earlier, 75% of the dogs we get in are under eight weeks old, indicating that we have a true overpopulation problem, rather than the owner retention problem that many members here talk about.

:hail:
Same here at the shelters I work with. I've seen it time and time again, the dogs return with pups in tow. Nobody follows through on the contracts.
Our vet will do 8 weeks/two lb. and we've had tremendous success doing that in our rescue.

 

[corgipower]

If we are adopting those animals out intact, what good are we doing? After all, as I have mentioned earlier, 75% of the dogs we get in are under eight weeks old, indicating that we have a true overpopulation problem, rather than the owner retention problem that many members here talk about.

I still see that as a retention/responsibility issue. Those puppies aren't brought in because the person couldn't find homes, but because the person didn't take measures to prevent the breeding in the first place and then when they had pups they might or might not have tried to find homes for them, but either way they weren't responsible enough to keep what they produced.

In the case of shelter that's so overwhelmed they can't screen adopters, speutering might very well be necessary.

But rescues that take pride in turning down applicants, the few elite that are good enough to get a dog surely are responsible enough to handle an intact one.

 

[corgipower]

Without irresponsible people placing dogs willy-nilly, the shelters would be empty.

In some parts of the country, the shelters would be empty if they didn't import from other parts of the country.

but all of mine are speutered for my peace of mind, their peace of mind, and for the example they set.

Mine are intact and unbred and leashed for the example they set.

 

[dachshunds4me]

the few elite that are good enough to get a dog surely are responsible enough to handle an intact one.

They probably are - but why take that chance? (and FTR, I hate turning people down, we certainly do not "take pride" in it).

Because sure as the world, Joe Schmo will see a dog like his (esp. the purebred ones) and decide he and the adopter need to make a quick buck.
If I lived in the same town and could follow up, no problem. And I have done this, too. They simply bring the dog back at 4-6mos. or whatever, and there ya go. Since they live close, no biggie.

But you can't cover all the bases, all the time, so this is our way of covering the ones we can, since most our adoptions take place in excess of 200 miles from here, and it's tough to get a dog back to spay/neuter at that point, no matter how many fancy words are in our contract.

And if folks don't like it, they are welcome to shop elsewhere, it makes me no nevermind because as I said, the ones who adopt from us are happy their pet is already altered.

 

[Linds]

Mine are intact and unbred and leashed for the example they set.

THANK YOU!

Our vet will do 8 weeks/two lb. and we've had tremendous success doing that in our rescue.

That makes me gag. Seriously.

Honestly, this whole thread makes me a little ill and exemplifies the reason I more than likely won't ever get a puppy from a rescue and if/when I get an adult rescue dog it's going to be from a county shelter where it'll be my dog once I get it and I won't have to jump through 50 hoops and sign a 20 page long contract about what I will and won't do with the dog that's going to be living with me. And to be even more honest this is why I'll more than likely just continue on getting dogs from breeders for the most part.

But regardless, my dog has balls and dews, and is keeping both. But if one had to go, it would be the dews.

 

[dachshunds4me]

Well when folks want to do rescue they can do it as they see fit, and we'll do ours how we see fit, plain and simple. I have to wonder why it bothers you so when you don't live near us, aren't in rescue and don't plan to adopt a dog altered thusly (as many shelters across the nation are doing)?? Why take it so personal that you are gagging?? :scritches head:

I haven't seen many rescuers sign on to this thread, I wonder why (said sarcastically).

 

[dachshunds4me]

I no longer go in the Fire Hydrant because I'm sick to death of nonstop political threads. I've learned to avoid threads about rescues on this board, because it chased me away from here for several months at one point. I figured a dew claw thread would be safe, but never fear; people here can get their panties in a freaking wad about anything, and turn any thread around to suit their own agenda.

How true those words were...

 

[Picklepaige]

Hm, I didn't think of owner retention that way. I my mind, the puppies dumped never really had "owners," just people who seem to forget that two intact dogs of the opposite sex = puppies.

And how does this make you gag? We have to look at the population as a whole, not just individual. I'd rather see dogs altered at the time of adoption that kill their puppies later. Maybe the shelter you volunteer with doesn't have this problem.

Look, I don't particular like pediatric S/N either. If I ever get a male dog from a breeder, he will not be neutered, period. But if I adopted out an unfixed puppy, I would never be free from that guilt.

After the fifth year of volunteering and seeing litters upon litters killed, I've started to appreciate pediatric spaying and neutering. Ever since we started that policy, the intake rate for puppies has dropped drastically.

I would think that 70+ dead puppies a day would make you gag more than pediatric spaying and neutering, which probably won't end up affecting them anyway.

 

[Laurelin]

I seriously think this is getting ridiculous...

Look, rescues and shelters need to operate differently than a regular owner. The idea that pediatric spay and neuter in these situations makes you gag or means a rescue is not reputable (as has been highly hinted at) is quite frankly ridiculous. Maybe your area isn't like mine but it would be SERIOUSLY irresponsible to not neuter the rescues here. When the kill rate of your shelter is 70% you have simply got to do something.

Each rescue will have to do what they believe best. The fact is there is absolutely NO guarantee a dog won't be bred without it being neutered before being adopted out. This is the ONLY foolproof method a rescue or shelter has to try to curb the intake. Don't like the policy? go elsewhere...

I don't care what you do with your own dogs, that's for each person or rescue to decide for themselves. What is so bad about letting other people make those choices for themselves? In rescue you are balancing a lot and often the goal is the bigger picture. We don't know the area or the situation so how can we tell them how they should run?

I see a lot of very anti-spay/neuter posts on more than just this board and it frustrates me to no end to be honest. It's actually quite amusing because the same people complaining that people push s/n on them will sit and call people irresponsible for neutering their dogs. The fact is, it's a choice that each person needs to weigh for themselves. I have not seen anywhere in this thread where the OP has said it's irresponsible to own an intact dog, just that she feels for her RESCUE it is best to spay and neuter before placing. Why are people reading all this 'intact dogs are horrible' into this? I don't get it.

And yes, I have always had intact dogs but that's besides the point. Rescues are quite a bit different than my own personal dogs.

Just my 2 cents. And yes, this has been brewing a while. :lol-sign:

 

[Dekka]

Well when folks want to do rescue they can do it as they see fit, and we'll do ours how we see fit, plain and simple. I have to wonder why it bothers you so when you don't live near us, aren't in rescue and don't plan to adopt a dog altered thusly (as many shelters across the nation are doing)?? Why take it so personal that you are gagging?? :scritches head:

I haven't seen many rescuers sign on to this thread, I wonder why (said sarcastically).

I foster dogs and help with the JRTRO when I can (albeit much less since I have been busy and school) and I am not sickened but very disheartened by the idea of 8 week s/n. One one had I get why rescues do it, but on the other hand it make me rage that you have to mutilate a puppy (and I think removing important hormone producing organs at such a young age when the body NEEDS them for proper growth IS mutilation) just so it can be owned by irresponsible people. I think most rescues shoot themselves in the foot, you see it over and over again, great homes being passed over simply because of a check list. NOT because its a bad home. (thankfully the JRTRO isn't like that)

I still think this would all be moot if you could just make ALL breeders, everyone from championship kennels to oops litters to millers and everyone in between responsible for every puppy they produce then people would be far less blase about letting their dogs have oops pups.

 

[Laurelin]

I still think this would all be moot if you could just make ALL breeders, everyone from championship kennels to oops litters to millers and everyone in between responsible for every puppy they produce then people would be far less blase about letting their dogs have oops pups.

Agreed.

Unfortunately though rescues and shelters are often caught up cleaning up other peoples' messes. I honestly cannot think of a way around pediatric spay and neuter in the shelter I worked in. We euthanized 70% of the animals that came in. It's unbelievable and we don't have the luxury of being very choosy with the owners. So what else do you do?

 

[corgipower]

They probably are - but why take that chance?

Because it's healthier for the dog.

 

[Laurelin]

Because it's healthier for the dog.

For a RESCUE though? To me it is just not worth it in that scenario. In my own personal dogs then sure but if I'm placing a rescue dog then no way, no how.

 

[dachshunds4me]

I foster dogs and help with the JRTRO when I can (albeit much less since I have been busy and school) and I am not sickened but very disheartened by the idea of 8 week s/n. One one had I get why rescues do it, but on the other hand it make me rage that you have to mutilate a puppy (and I think removing important hormone producing organs at such a young age when the body NEEDS them for proper growth IS mutilation) just so it can be owned by irresponsible people. I think most rescues shoot themselves in the foot, you see it over and over again, great homes being passed over simply because of a check list. NOT because its a bad home. (thankfully the JRTRO isn't like that)

I still think this would all be moot if you could just make ALL breeders, everyone from championship kennels to oops litters to millers and everyone in between responsible for every puppy they produce then people would be far less blase about letting their dogs have oops pups.

Yes it is sad we've come to this but as I mentioned, this is one base we can cover, and we do it.
We don't follow a check list when screening homes, per se, and have made exceptions to about every "rule" there is on our little application.

And as for your last paragraph - that'd be nice but not in this lifetime, I can't imagine. People are just too selfish and want what they want, when they want it, which is why so many millers and BYBs are in business.

 

[dachshunds4me]

For a RESCUE though? To me it is just not worth it in that scenario. In my own personal dogs then sure but if I'm placing a rescue dog then no way, no how.

Ditto. No way, no how. Not when we can do it earlier/prior to placement.
And again, what is it to YOU (that is, Corgi and the other naysayers)? You're not getting one of our dogs, and I seriously doubt you know anyone who is!
In fact this whole thing has become comical and as one person said via PM, people are arguing just to be arguing.
It's really long past being a discussion. Kinda sad...and the reason I often stay away from message boards in fact.

And in fact the "health of the dog" is taken into consideration - and your theories about early spay/neuter being so harmful are just that, theories. There's just as much evidence that pediatric s/n is quite safe and preferable to doing it later, so why do you think *you* are the only one who is right??
Because out of the tons of material that says s/n is safe, ONE person (or maybe two, now) wrote an article about how bad it can be??
Well - in our case the risks of having "possibly" some problems "down the road" aren't enough to outweigh the proven benefits of early s/n, the primary being prevention of future litters.

The end.
Literally. I'm out of this idiotic argument.

 

[Dekka]

Yes it is sad we've come to this but as I mentioned, this is one base we can cover, and we do it.
We don't follow a check list when screening homes, per se, and have made exceptions to about every "rule" there is on our little application.

And as for your last paragraph - that'd be nice but not in this lifetime, I can't imagine. People are just too selfish and want what they want, when they want it, which is why so many millers and BYBs are in business.

No I mean leave them in business, but treat them like a business. Make them accountable for their 'refuse'. Not sure if I have posted my 'idea' in a while, but for the newbies.

Make a law that all dogs sold or transferred from the breeder MUST be micro chipped (sponsor it even, as it would save money) with the breeder's name and address permanently on there. The owner would also be listed if they wanted, but you can't erase the breeder's info. Then any dog that enters a shelter would be scanned. The breeder would then be given the option to either come and get the dog, or pay for its stay in the rescue/shelter till it is adopted. This would solve so many problems. And if people knew they would be responsible for life for the pups produced by their pets they would be a little more careful.