Dew Claws??

Saeleofu

Active Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
9,036
Likes
0
Points
36
two intact dogs of the opposite sex = puppies.
No, two intact dogs of the opposite sex + idiot owner = puppies. When I was growing up we had two intact males with one intact female for YEARS and NEVER had anything happen. Come to think of it, the female actually was from a rescue, and she wasn't altered. Before the city shelter and the humane society merged a couple years ago, dogs from the city were sent out unaltered with like a $50 voucher for having them altered later. My dad worked at the city shelter so there wasn't an adoption fee anyway (actually he was the one who picked the dog up off the street, he was animal control at the time), so the $50 voucher didn't matter.


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.
This. A responsible breeder will make sure they are there for all their dogs/pups anyway, but sadly not every "breeder" is a responsible one.


What I find sad is that even people who are otherwise responsible and would never let their dogs get knocked up anyway (or let their dog knock up another dog) are pushed into early speutering (even if their dog is from a breeder and not a rescue) because people are SO rabid about it. If someone stands up and says no, I'm waiting/not neutering, they're almost always labelled as bad/crazy/idiots at least by their vet if not the general public (seriously, I'd LOVE to work for a vet that doesn't promote early speutering, BYBs, GLs and crap foods...those are my biggest peeves at work). If someone at the clinic brings up health benefits of leaving their dog intact, doc automatically goes into his testicular cancer and mammary cancer speech. Ugh. And instead of going home and researching it, they take their vet's word for it, because a vet should know best, right? (GAG.)

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.
Well IMO telling someone if they don't agree to that little addendum you posted that they are unfit for one of your dogs, that's kind of a (short) checklist, but the point is, the result is the same - an otherwise great home turned down because of one little thing.
 

Saeleofu

Active Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
9,036
Likes
0
Points
36
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.
THAT would be awesome.
 

CharlieDog

Rude and Not Ginger
Joined
Jan 31, 2008
Messages
9,419
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
Georgia
I really really really really like Dekka's idea. But I've no clue how one would go about implementing that. And microchipping can fail.
 

corgipower

Tweleve Enthusiest
Joined
Sep 19, 2007
Messages
8,233
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
here
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.
Now you turn this thread into a microchipping discussion. ;)

So I would have a choice...risk my dogs' well being with a microchip or never be a breeder...
 

Saeleofu

Active Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
9,036
Likes
0
Points
36
risk my dogs' well being with a microchip or never be a breeder...
What a tough decision ;)

But actually the way its set up, your dog will be chipped regardless, because your dog's breeder was a breeder and thus had to chip the pup.

But anyway... ;)
 

corgipower

Tweleve Enthusiest
Joined
Sep 19, 2007
Messages
8,233
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
here
What a tough decision
Yes, actually, it is.

But actually the way its set up, your dog will be chipped regardless, because your dog's breeder was a breeder and thus had to chip the pup.
Yeah...and I'm not in love with that either...but I have owned dogs that were chipped prior to me getting them. But it would take away my option to breed dogs. Because I won't put a chip in my dogs.
 

Saeleofu

Active Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
9,036
Likes
0
Points
36
Yeah...and I'm not in love with that either...but I have owned dogs that were chipped prior to me getting them. But it would take away my option to breed dogs. Because I won't put a chip in my dogs.
Too bad that for the vast majority of people that have no business breeding dogs, that's probably not the case.

I can see tattoos being used in a similar way, though. Still not foolproof, of course.

I can also see people moving and not changing their breeder info (what better way to escape responsibility?). But hey, it's a start.
 

LauraLeigh

Active Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2008
Messages
3,752
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
Brighton Ontario
I don't like ped. S/N… But totally understand why an overwhelmed shelter may do that…

I am a perfect example of how an Oops litter can happen… And how a slight change in situation (My daughter moving into the other half of the house with an intact male, who does not live with us but close enough for my FIL to allow him to visit) I managed breeding dogs for years without trouble, but my current litter is a direct result, sadly, of mismanagement… I know people who preach that they are responsible etc etc… Who in fact had Oops themselves… All it takes is for a few minutes for your animals to be entrusted to someone else… I all reality, my litter is the result of a teeny window where no one else was home, and Di was in heat (She only had a heat every 18 months) and my FIL decided to let Monte into our home when he heard him barking… He went to the kids door, let him out, let him in mine, and had him back before anyone got home…. A comedy of circumstances that would have been prevented had Jenn and Matt fixed Monte, or I had spayed Di….

Again, not saying I like S/N too young…. and some rescues who can screen the hec out of their applicants should not need to S/N super young… However I sure understand why some feel the need….
 

Dekka

Just try me..
Joined
May 14, 2007
Messages
19,779
Likes
3
Points
38
Age
48
Location
Ontario
Now you turn this thread into a microchipping discussion. ;)

So I would have a choice...risk my dogs' well being with a microchip or never be a breeder...
I was worried about health risks of microchipps, now I am not. All the bruhaha about it being bad and dangerous was pretty much shoddy science and proving the agenda of the funding agent.

And you could do it, you would just have to keep all the puppehs lol. :popcorn:
 

Saeleofu

Active Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
9,036
Likes
0
Points
36
All the bruhaha about it being bad and dangerous was pretty much shoddy science and proving the agenda of the funding agent.
Kinda like the bullshit and hype about vaccines causing autism...and then the study was retracted because the data was falsified.

I personally chip my dogs. They don't wear collars unless we're out, but with the small, small chance of one of them getting out, I'm more comfortable having them chipped. Whatever harm a chip may or may not cause, Gavroche getting into a shelter and not being chipped is more deadly (unchipped "pitbulls" don't make it out alive very often around here, and add Gavroche's dislike for large men and people touching his penis, and he'd be doomed) Plus Gavroche is required to be chipped (and neutered) because to the city he's a "pit bull" even though he's a boxer.
 

Dekka

Just try me..
Joined
May 14, 2007
Messages
19,779
Likes
3
Points
38
Age
48
Location
Ontario
Dekka is chipped, the dekklets aren't as I was still on the fence. Now my next litter will be. Cargo's chip had never been switched over to his new owner when I got him back. So if had gotten dumped I likely would have gotten him back. (which as a breeder is comforting... I would love to have a way for my dogs to never be able to fall through the cracks)
 

corgipower

Tweleve Enthusiest
Joined
Sep 19, 2007
Messages
8,233
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
here
I know people who preach that they are responsible etc etc… Who in fact had Oops themselves…
Yes, oopses do happen. But someone responsible will continue to be responsible for the oops litter. They'll provide appropriate care for mom and pups, they'll find good homes for the pups, they'll keep what they can't find homes for, they'll take back dogs if the need arises.
 

corgipower

Tweleve Enthusiest
Joined
Sep 19, 2007
Messages
8,233
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
here
I was worried about health risks of microchipps, now I am not. All the bruhaha about it being bad and dangerous was pretty much shoddy science and proving the agenda of the funding agent.
Everything I've seen about it being safe has been studies put out by the chip companies...I have yet to see a reliable impartial study on the subject.

And you could do it, you would just have to keep all the puppehs lol. :popcorn:
:D
Oh, now there's an idea.
MOAR Corgis!!

But...I might want to share my brilliant progeny with others. :(
 

LauraLeigh

Active Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2008
Messages
3,752
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
Brighton Ontario
Yes, oopses do happen. But someone responsible will continue to be responsible for the oops litter. They'll provide appropriate care for mom and pups, they'll find good homes for the pups, they'll keep what they can't find homes for, they'll take back dogs if the need arises.
As will I…. and I should clarify, I know of breeders who preach that S/N is not needed if you are responsible, but yet at least one had a oops litter…. I am not saying Oops litters don't happen to responsible breeders, if that's how it came across… Simply that someone who had an Oops litter should not tell Joe Public that all they have to do is manage carefully…. But rather ask them what they would do if an Oops happened…
 

Dekka

Just try me..
Joined
May 14, 2007
Messages
19,779
Likes
3
Points
38
Age
48
Location
Ontario
Actually its not. There has been independent data in the last while. You will also notice that the 'evils' of chips were only published in really obscure journals, the science wouldn't stand up to the rigours of a highly respected journal.

More and more work with implanted prosthetics and stuff show that it doesn't cause cancer and other scary things.
 

Dekka

Just try me..
Joined
May 14, 2007
Messages
19,779
Likes
3
Points
38
Age
48
Location
Ontario
As will I…. and I should clarify, I know of breeders who preach that S/N is not needed if you are responsible, but yet at least one had a oops litter…. I am not saying Oops litters don't happen to responsible breeders, if that's how it came across… Simply that someone who had an Oops litter should not tell Joe Public that all they have to do is manage carefully…. But rather ask them what they would do if an Oops happened…
This is very true, I had an oops (as in a cycle early) litter. Same as you did, other people looking after. But if you consider the amount of inact dogs a breeder has its much more likely to happen to someone with 7 dogs than one or two. Also if you are waiting for maturity then its also easier...

Right now many oops litters are not really oops. They are people who let dogs run around together and go 'duh how did that happen'. If the odd oops litter happened and people were still responsible (if you wanted to keep your dogs intact for life) with the pups, than IMO thats fine. But really its not that hard to keep a dog managed for 6 months to a year to wait for maturity.
 

corgipower

Tweleve Enthusiest
Joined
Sep 19, 2007
Messages
8,233
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
here
But rather ask them what they would do if an Oops happened…
Yes!:D

Actually its not. There has been independent data in the last while. You will also notice that the 'evils' of chips were only published in really obscure journals, the science wouldn't stand up to the rigours of a highly respected journal.

More and more work with implanted prosthetics and stuff show that it doesn't cause cancer and other scary things.
Well, show me the studies.

And it's not just cancer that I worry about.
 

LauraLeigh

Active Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2008
Messages
3,752
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
Brighton Ontario
This is very true, I had an oops (as in a cycle early) litter. Same as you did, other people looking after. But if you consider the amount of inact dogs a breeder has its much more likely to happen to someone with 7 dogs than one or two. Also if you are waiting for maturity then its also easier...

Right now many oops litters are not really oops. They are people who let dogs run around together and go 'duh how did that happen'. If the odd oops litter happened and people were still responsible (if you wanted to keep your dogs intact for life) with the pups, than IMO thats fine. But really its not that hard to keep a dog managed for 6 months to a year to wait for maturity.
I agree, 6 months to a year should not be an issue…. And if an Oops happened to people willing to properly deal with it, then that may not be as bad… As odds are the pups will not end up in shelters...

But it's the people who do the bolded part of your reply that shelters have to worry about, and frankly, no matter how well you screen, there will be some owners who know all the right answers and still will do what you describe above, or shelters so desperate that they simply don't have the ability to screen as well as a smaller rescue… I fully understand why they S/N before the dogs leave their care… Though I have a very hard time with 8 weeks of age… However I also would rather see that, then pups put down because of lack of ability to care for them until 6 months, or worse being BYB because the screening process was limited….
 

Picklepaige

Active Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2006
Messages
1,802
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
Mississippi
No, two intact dogs of the opposite sex + idiot owner = puppies.
That's what I said ;)

People don't seem to get it through their heads that if you leave a female intact dog alone with a male intact dog 24/7, puppies will happen. From talking to people at the shelter, they just laugh and say "I never would have expected that they liked each other so much!"

I'm not lying. People are idiots. And when we suggest spaying the mother, they gasp and get angry for suggesting we ruin their doggy's "fun time."

Of course, these are the same people who sigh and say "it's life" when we tell them the puppies are going straight to the back to the be killed, because we have too many strays coming in to care for owner surrenders. And, of course, they are also the same people who bring in litters over and over and over again.
 

Danefied

New Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2010
Messages
1,722
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
Southeast
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:
:hail::hail::hail:

Lets face it, there is plenty about the "health" of our dogs where we weigh the pros and cons. I find general anesthesia in an 8 week old just for an aesthetics crop to be a risk *I* am not willing to take (and no, I'm not against cropping for anyone else, just not something I would do - gawd please lets not turn this in to a cropping debate now LOL!) Feeding questionable ingredients in dog food is not a risk *I* am willing to take, but I'm not going to condemn another owner who decides beet pulp isn't so bad for their dog.
I am willing to "risk" a speuter because I have seen bad pyo and I have seen testicular torsion and prostate issues, and had a 10 year old intact rhodesian die of osteosarcoma. Its just not worth it to me to leave my dogs intact. Its personal based on MY experiences.

Rescues and shelters make the decisions they do not because they just LOVE the thought of speutering an 8 week old, but because they have been burned before by not doing so. If its the choice between a pediatric speuter and the needle for lack of space I'm going with the pediatric neuter. I don't know why this is seen as evil incarnate.
 

Members online

No members online now.
Top