Don't breed your dog unless you have £1200 spare

foreign_correspondent

cinderellacomplex - you have to bear in mind that we knew very little about you, or your reasons for breeding from your first post. Also, it strikes me that everyone who has ever discussed breeding their dog on here says they are a responsible owner, and is certain that they will be able to find good homes for their dogs. I doubt anyone breeds pups thinking they will end up on death row, but that is the fate of 9000 of them each year, sadly.

Many people considering breeding also seem to be operating with a lack of awareness - they believe that their breed don't end up in rescue, or that only mongrels do, or that if people have paid out a lot for a pup they will look after it, or that their pups and their new owners will somehow be immune to the 'slings and arrows of outrageous fortune' that life can throw at us over the fifteen years (plus) of each pups lifespan...

I hope that is any good comes out of this situation and this little dog's sad death, it may be that the sad story will serve some purpose in making people really consider the implications of breeding... and posting links to highlight the rescue problem is about honest information regarding the magnitute of the problem, which some people are sadly still unaware of.

cinderellacomplex

foreign_correspondent wrote: »

cinderellacomplex - you have to bear in mind that we knew very little about you, or your reasons for breeding from your first post. Also, it strikes me that everyone who has ever discussed breeding their dog on here says they are a responsible owner, and is certain that they will be able to find good homes for their dogs. I doubt anyone breeds pups thinking they will end up on death row, but that is the fate of 9000 of them each year, sadly.

Many people considering breeding also seem to be operating with a lack of awareness - they believe that their breed don't end up in rescue, or that only mongrels do, or that if people have paid out a lot for a pup they will look after it, or that their pups and their new owners will somehow be immune to the 'slings and arrows of outrageous fortune' that life can throw at us over the fifteen years (plus) of each pups lifespan...

I hope that is any good comes out of this situation and this little dog's sad death, it may be that the sad story will serve some purpose in making people really consider the implications of breeding... and posting links to highlight the rescue problem is about honest information regarding the magnitute of the problem, which some people are sadly still unaware of.

I know, it's just a pain that I have to qualify it on a post that was only a comment on someone else's story.

And of course no one thinks that their pups will end up at the pound but then again plenty are happy to let them go off with a complete stranger after a quick email or brief chat.

Rescues have been known to microchip dogs in their own name so that if anything happens they are notified and can reunite them with their owners. It might be a good idea for breeders to do similarly, or for the petlog system to be altered so that a breeder contact may be entered alongside an owner contact. The owner would be the first point of contact for rescues etc and the breeder the second should there be problems contacting the owner or if they don't want to have anything to do with it. It would certainly let breeders know when their dogs ended up in rescues so that they could do something about it.

foreign_correspondent

cinderellacomplex wrote: »

Rescues have been known to microchip dogs in their own name so that if anything happens they are notified and can reunite them with their owners. It might be a good idea for breeders to do similarly, or for the petlog system to be altered so that a breeder contact may be entered alongside an owner contact. The owner would be the first point of contact for rescues etc and the breeder the second should there be problems contacting the owner or if they don't want to have anything to do with it. It would certainly let breeders know when their dogs ended up in rescues so that they could do something about it.

I agree.. it would be hard to enforce, but if it could be made common practice. It would also enable breeders who regularly produce ill dogs or dogs with temprement problems to be identified. The problem is, I do not expect that back yard breeders like the ones in this story would bother for a moment... as so many never bother with health checks for the parents, vaccs, worming etc...

chucknorris

cinderellacomplex wrote: »

I can't take responsibility for every unwanted border collie out there. .

Nobody (certainly not me) is asking you to, I have no idea where you got that notion from.

I actually spend a lot of my time doing homechecks for various rescue centres, it doesn't mean that I am taking responsibility for all unwated dogs, it just means that I am doing my bit. Likewise when my wife retires we are looking at the idea of starting a charity (but funded by us rather than seeking contributions) of matching up dogs in rescue centres with older people who would like a dog but need support and/or financial backing to look after that dog.

I just thought that if you were so keen to place dogs in good homes, it makes more sense to start with the dogs that are stuck in rescue centres.

cinderellacomplex

chucknorris wrote: »

Nobody (certainly not me) is asking you to, I have no idea where you got that notion from.

I actually spend a lot of my time doing homechecks for various rescue centres, it doesn't mean that I am taking responsibility for all unwated dogs, it just means that I am doing my bit. Likewise when my wife retires we are looking at the idea of starting a charity (but funded by us rather than seeking contributions) of matching up dogs in rescue centres with older people who would like a dog but need support and/or financial backing to look after that dog.

I just thought that if you were so keen to place dogs in good homes, it makes more sense to start with the dogs that are stuck in rescue centres.

I think that you missed my point, but it's good to hear that you are doing what you can I can't do as much as I would like to right now because I have other commitments, but I would love if I got to the point in my life where I could foster border collies who are unlikely to be homed because of behavioural problems - work with them a bit and give them a fighting chance. Like I said, it's not something that I can do right now but hopefully someday I will have the time (and somehow have developed an immunity to sad rescue dogs - otherwise I will take them home and they'll never leave!)

I actually know a fair few people who have wanted rescue dogs over the years and were rejected because a) their garden wasn't 'fully fenced' (even though the same rescue allowed people in flats to have dogs - you would have thought that having a garden at all would be an advantage as long as you didn't just let the dog run around unsupervised; b) they currently had unneutered/unspayed dogs - this rule really made me angry because it is a prime example of the 'don't ever breed ever' attitude of some people; and finally c) one lady worked for HALF AN HOUR longer than the max time the rescue would accept. I know that there have to be standards, but man I wish that rescues would use a little bit more discretion sometimes because I swear that some dogs have missed out on great homes.

ANGLICANPAT

Quote Cinderellacomplex " rejected because a) their garden wasn't 'fully fenced' "

Only someone who wasnt a rescue worker/homechecker could find that puzzling . The last thing a rescue wants for a newly homed dog is for it to be able to escape. Many are frightened and confused by a new home and will make serious attempts to blindly escape and maybe get run over or lost. Secure fencing is essential for most newly homed rescues. The average person wont religiously go out with the dog on a lead in their garden every time it needs to attempt a wee (many are not house trained remember) . They might the first week, but experience tells rescues that people sooon get bored with this when it rains or whatever, and 'take the chance' in letting the dog out in the garden on its own.

chucknorris

ANGLICANPAT wrote: »

Quote Cinderellacomplex " rejected because a) their garden wasn't 'fully fenced' "

Only someone who wasnt a rescue worker/homechecker could find that puzzling . The last thing a rescue wants for a newly homed dog is for it to be able to escape. Many are frightened and confused by a new home and will make serious attempts to blindly escape and maybe get run over or lost. Secure fencing is essential for most newly homed rescues. The average person wont religiously go out with the dog on a lead in their garden every time it needs to attempt a wee (many are not house trained remember) . They might the first week, but experience tells rescues that people sooon get bored with this when it rains or whatever, and 'take the chance' in letting the dog out in the garden on its own.

Only last week I did a homecheck and afterwards called the rescue and said that although the fence was currently inadequate the lady was anticipating a new section of fencing to be installed that weekend and that she seemed very responsible but I would go back a week later if they wanted me to.

I had to get part of my own fence replaced in advance of getting our own rescue dog. I think if getting the fence seen to is too much trouble then they are not likley to be avery responsible dog owner anyway, although I accept it could be a significant cost if you are talking about a huge garden.

By the way thanks for starting that other thread as it brought to my attention the 'cinnamon trust' who I had not previously heard of.

ANGLICANPAT

Quote Cinderellacomplex
" I would disagree that good homes are hard to find "

I know some of us on here are homecheckers. Cant imagine that many of us would agree with the above, or rescues wouldnt be heaving. Ask any responsible rescue and they will tell you that out of every dozen or so calls , only one will lead to a suitable home. However , I guess if we didnt worry about whether they might escape and so forth ....

Silveralice

Of course we only know what was written in the paper, not the true facts. As a vet, I know very well that sometimes what appears in the media bears little resemblance to what actually happens in these cases. A common solution to this problem would be for the vet to do the Caesar, maybe without charge, on condition that the !!!!! and puppies are signed over to a rescue organisation - then the welfare of the dog is provided for but the owners don't get free treatment, and it means that the vets can do the odd charitable op FOC without being bankrupted by a stream of people wanting free treatment on the grounds they can't pay. I wonder if that was among the options the owners were offered? Sounds like a lot of money for a Caesar, though, unless it was out of hours (or danger money!!!)

jamespir

poor dog some people dont deserve pets