Dog Rescue and Ex breeding stock

quirky

Well-Known Member
Joined
3 January 2008
Messages
9,846
Location
Purdah
I've been looking at a well known rescue site tonight and am amazed at the amount of ex breeding stock that the charity have.

Is this normal?
Is that what breeders do? When dog has served its purpose it is left with a charity?
Surely the dogs deserve more than that?

I'm not sure I want to know but I'll ask anyway.
Do some breeders have their bitches/stud dogs pts once they have done their job?

Finally, I'm wondering if the charity are doing the right thing be taking the dogs from the breeders.

Anyway, it made very sad viewing :( and I think I am extremely naive in these things :eek:.
 

MurphysMinder

Well-Known Member
Joined
20 November 2006
Messages
16,657
Location
Shropshire
I'll think you'll find that most of those poor bitches come from puppy farmers rather than responsible breeders. Some breeders do place their bitches direct into pet homes when they are retired, but most keep them themselves.
 

CorvusCorax

I'm Dill Dandon
Joined
15 January 2008
Messages
49,928
Location
The shadows, apparently.
No, reputable breeders don't do this.
Puppy farmers, however, do.

'Breeders' and puppy farmers are two completely different things.

If it is the rescue I am thinking of, it is located near a puppy farm hot-spot, the bitches have often prolapsed and have hanging bellies from so many litters, have lived in sheds their whole lives so have no muscle, have never been socialised with people or other dogs or been in a house.

I have really mixed feelings about the rescue basically offering a mopping up service for people like this :( for them to be replaced with new breeding stock :(

I know a lot of breeders, most tend to hang on to their broods and studs, they have earned money and success for their owners, a long and happy retirement is the least they are owed. They are more likely to move on dogs that have not shaped up for the show ring or work or breeding, and the ones I know rehome to family friends, pet owners looking for an older pup/dog etc, that's how we have ended up with all of ours, the last three were not suitable for showing and sold to us by the breeders/previous owners, who had known us for years and know we can offer a good home.
 

Ravenwood

Well-Known Member
Joined
29 November 2005
Messages
11,196
Location
Devon
quirky - I have said many times on here before that the profusion of charity/rescue homes concerns me. Its not a popular thought and I imagine quite heart searching for some people to look at the bigger picture and wonder just how much good some of these charities are doing in the long run.

It would seem that anyone can start a charity, open up a rescue home - I could do it tomorrow. I took a friend's pony to one of these small scale charity homes a few years ago and was shocked tbf :( The complete lack of knowledge, the horrendous conditions etc but the owners thought they were doing a fabulous job by offering a horse/dog/cat/chicken - even a Dexter cow saved from slaughter - a life time home :eek:

At that point I swore that not only would I never, ever donate to a charity again unless I have seen it first hand but nor would I ever consider rehoming one of my own animals in this manner :(

Surely its time for the Gov to step in and review animal ownership and prevent it from becoming so disposable to which charities offer such an easy option :(
 

CorvusCorax

I'm Dill Dandon
Joined
15 January 2008
Messages
49,928
Location
The shadows, apparently.
In the Republic of Ireland, if a GSD, Dobe, Rott etc goes to a council pound as an unclaimed stray/unwanted, because they are on the dangerous dogs list, they are essentially dead.
That, obviously, pulls at a lot of people's heartstrings.

As I have said before, these rescue homes (the majority of which aim to rehome dogs, not keep them all forever, that is hoarding, not rescue) exist because council pounds put to sleep after a week/ten days because of the high rate of dogs being chucked out and abandoned and they are trying to buy these dogs more time.
Again, I am repeating myself, but most of the rescues here collect from pounds, respond to calls about strays, have them handed in by people who have found them or have dogs tied to their gates in the middle of the night, very few people have the balls to actually turn up and hand over a dog.

So I do think the blame lies squarely at the feet of the dog-chuckers, backyard breeders, puppy farmers etc and not the rescues themselves.

I do agree rescues taking Irish rescue dogs does not help Irish dog owners/breeders face up to the mess that has been created and I agree, no dog of mine would go to a rescue kennel, not because I think they are rubbish, but because it is MY dog and MY responsibility.
 

quirky

Well-Known Member
Joined
3 January 2008
Messages
9,846
Location
Purdah
quirky - I have said many times on here before that the profusion of charity/rescue homes concerns me. Its not a popular thought and I imagine quite heart searching for some people to look at the bigger picture and wonder just how much good some of these charities are doing in the long run.
(
I agree with this entirely. I have certainly had my eyes opened and can't really see how they are helping the over all situation.
It is very sad indeed :(.
 

CorvusCorax

I'm Dill Dandon
Joined
15 January 2008
Messages
49,928
Location
The shadows, apparently.
So if every rescue home shut down, today, it would help the situation?
Could anyone stand and watch with your own eyes, every single dog in a rescue home/every unwanted dog, get a needle? Because that is what would happen.

Yes, there are some completely messed-up poor sods in there who probably could do with being given sleep, but there are many dogs with no issues whatsoever in rescue through no fault of their own (bankruptcy, eviction, death of an owner with no extended family, there are litters of PUPPIES in there right now that have been found in a box)
for every one rescue dog with an issue I know of about ten who have settled in happily like any other dog.

While I agree there needs to be more regulation, better education and harsher penalties for crap owners and puppy farmers, I do not think doing away with rescue will help either.

Dog rescue is not a new phenomenon, Battersea Dogs Home opened in 1860.
What is a relatively new phenomenon is our throwaway society, our 'I want this NOW' mentality, our lack of responsibility for our actions, and the popularity and bloody free websites where you can buy and sell and dump animals like any other inanimate object.
That is where I like to aim my ire, not the people who work tirelessly to try and educate people, improve the situation and save dogs who are being earmarked for death, some of the time because they do not match the furniture, or were bought because they looked cute and are being discarded because they stopped being cute and started acting like dogs.
 

quirky

Well-Known Member
Joined
3 January 2008
Messages
9,846
Location
Purdah
So if every rescue home shut down, today, it would help the situation?
No, of course it wouldn't :confused:.

There's not much point getting narky with me :mad:. I'm not a dog breeder, never have, never will.
All my animals are with me for life, always have been, always will be :).
 

CorvusCorax

I'm Dill Dandon
Joined
15 January 2008
Messages
49,928
Location
The shadows, apparently.
Quirky, that's not me narky, at all, trust me :p :) and not sure what being a breeder or not has to do with my post, I am not a breeder either?! However I, by paying money for a dog bought from a breeder, have funded breeders and so have most of us on here, for good or ill.
Some better breeders than others :p

You said you can't see how 'they' help the overall situation and in terms of automatically saying 'yes' and taking on ex-breeding/puppy farm stock I agree - I am just wondering what people who disagree with dog rescue per se, think would help?
If rescues were not there, people would still get rid of their dogs. I think a lot of people, while they may tell themselves that an elderly lady with a big farm in the country will come to look for a lovely new pet in the council pound, they still realise, deep down, that the dog they are chucking out may just have a week left to live, and they probably don't care.
 
Last edited:

EAST KENT

Well-Known Member
Joined
17 June 2010
Messages
2,735
The rescues here with me are all perfectly nice staffies,on their last day before an appeal got a sponsor for them.It seems so wrong to kill them.The solution ..esp in staffies..is to severely limit or stop the breeding of them.Perhaps a licence for every litter before it is bred?
I don`t know the answer either,but certanly think we should concentrate on our own problems before importing rescues from other countries ,there is enough of our own making without going looking.:(
 

Pendlehog

Well-Known Member
Joined
29 April 2007
Messages
505
Location
Lancs
The face of rescue is changing whether people like it or not, people are now so keen to "get rid" they are offering to donate decent amounts of money for us to take a dog in FAST. yes there are still the idiots who bring their dog in claiming its a stray (we are now so full we cant take any stray that isnt in need of medical attention) or that tie them up on the carpark, but there are LOTS of seemingly nice middle class families keen to boot out their pet.
Tragically the nicer the rescue looks, the more acceptable people find it, we are now seeing as many pedigree dogs as bull breeds and crosses, but the issue is not that rescue has become too accomodating, rather that rehoming has become more socially acceptable.
I have no idea what the solution is, but until people wise up and realise there are NOT thousands of lovely people with big gardens and unlimited time out there for their rejected pup things will not change.
 

tamsinkb

Well-Known Member
Joined
21 August 2005
Messages
831
Location
North Devon
I recently enquired about rehoming an ex-breeding cocker spaniel bitch from a rescue very close to an area with lots of puppy farms - they had stipulated that ex breeders need to be rehomed with an adult resident dog, preferably of the opposite sex and that was calm and confident - My Bruce to a 'T' -I was declined because 2 days a week my dog is left for more that 3 hours total in a 24 hour period - no mention of this on their website.....just that they recommended that dogs were not left for more than 4 hours at a time ( which Bruce isn't)...call me bitter and twisted, but I am not too surprised that they have a large number of ex-breeders on their lists.....
 

Ravenwood

Well-Known Member
Joined
29 November 2005
Messages
11,196
Location
Devon
Lots of points to pick up on this thread but too tired to multi quote :eek:

If all rescue homes were shut down tomorrow .... this is a ridiculous idea and is not going to happen! Rescue homes are becoming more and more prevalent. There are plenty of do gooders who think they are doing the right thing - this will never change, it is a human trait.

I can't imagine that anyone is against rescuing a dog in need - it goes beyond human nature. Unfortunately it also creates an outlet for those less heartless.

Pendledog - without quoting your whole post - yes I agree entirely, society has changed and become a get it now, pay for it later, disposable world. But can you not see that by creating an easy option to offload your dog whether you offer a generous donation or not is in fact fuelling this mindset? It is a viscious cycle.

And of course Battersea started in the 1800's in a hugely over populated city where stray dogs were a problem, it is hardly suprisinging then that someone with money and a heart felt the need to try and rectify the problem.

I am not anti rescue homes or anti charities - despite how my replies read. Infact, if I didn't work full time I would offer my services as a foster home for dogs but at the same time we need a reality check here.

Its all very well blaming breeders but they have found a niche in the market and are making a good buck from it. So who is to blame.. the breeder or the purchaser? This section of the forum is very anti crossbreeds and advocates pure breds but in my experience, if you take for example that the labrador is the most common pet dog, there are very few labrador breeders who are concerned about good lines, more likely they see pound signs in their eyes if they have a bitch and can put it to a same breed dog.

So who oversees pedigree and breeding? The Kennel Club mainly and yet in the same breath those that pounce on mongrels, have nothing good to say for the KC - its a lose, lose situation.

Another point about bringing in dogs from Ireland, I read on another dog forum about a charity that took on a GSD from Ireland. They took it on knowing it had been a stray, hit by a car and had huge medical surgeries and bills to look forward to - they took it on knowing they didn't have the money to fund it so appealed to the public for help - is that professional? Does that give you faith in charity homes?

As I have said before - education is the way forward for purchasers of dogs, the profusion of charities are providing an easy get out clause for them.

And finally (phew I hear you say!) to the last poster - yes I totally agree, the ridiculous and non waivering policies that some charities adhere to makes it impossible for good, experienced dog owners to adopt a dog - I most certainly would not be considered as a potential home for a rescue dog.
 
Last edited:

EAST KENT

Well-Known Member
Joined
17 June 2010
Messages
2,735
Do you not think if every producer of a litter was by law required to microchip/tattoo them before sale it would be a plus.Then ,if they were requested either to take back,or give ,say,£100 for each one that landed up in rescue? So simple ,so effective.
 

PucciNPoni

Well-Known Member
Joined
23 March 2009
Messages
4,064
Hi guys, I just wanted to quickly chime in on this. I think I know the rescue you're talking about. I have a fosterer near me that takes these dogs til they can find a home. She has kept a few which I have come to know over years, and many for rehoming she brings to me at her expense for grooming (often at a reduced rate - in as much as I'd love to do them FOC, I still have to run a business).

I have found, that despite their lack of socialisation skills to start with, they are actually really adoptable dogs, with very good temperaments, both in the salon and for this lady at home. They adapt quickly in to her pack. They come initially in terrible condition with skin issues, health problems, no way should any of them have been bred from. But they are, and they are "well used up" by the time the rescue picks them up.

It always makes me wonder if by rescuing them (at the expense of the rescue) if this is not helping the puppy farmers with their business, rather than discouraging them! I think it's a bit of a catch 22 and I find it frustrating to say the least. And yet the dogs that I've met, as individuals, have been such good natured things that you can't just put them to sleep, can you?
 

MurphysMinder

Well-Known Member
Joined
20 November 2006
Messages
16,657
Location
Shropshire
RW, to answer just one question you raise, I would say in the majority of cases it is the breeders fault as if they made the purchasers aware they would take back or help rehome any dog they would hopefully never end in rescue. To my knowledge I have only had one dog I bred end up in rescue, luckily it was a specific GSD rescue who checked for a tattoo and then contacted me, I was able to work with them to find her a home and she was soon settled again.
And yes, EK I do think every breeder should be made to identify each puppy permanently before they are sold, would be a very good start I think.
 

MinskiKaii

Well-Known Member
Joined
24 March 2010
Messages
580
I have just rehomed my 3rd rescue dog and they are all great, I wouldn't be without any of them. 2 were stray so no history, the 3rd was rehomed because, she bit and wasn't socialised with cats. They only had her 1 week, and she was 8 weeks old what do they expect!!

My first 2 were both 6 months when I got them and did need work like any puppy of that age would. 1 got his kennel club silver and the other got her gold. They both were pets as therapy dogs for many years. OK they might have taken a bit more work then most 6 month olds. But more than worth it.

The 3rd we rehomed a couple of months ago. A 2 yo staffyx. She does have quite a few issues, as she is very nervous, so barks alot or panics and shakes, so they wouldn't rehome her to homes with children. But she has already improved alot. It was heart breaking though, at the rescue centre. There were over 40 staffies and staffy x, how on earth are you supposed to pick! I find it very rewarding seeing the improvements in the dogs.
 

Boulty

Well-Known Member
Joined
14 April 2011
Messages
1,360
My opinion is that no in the long run it is not helpful for rescues to take "used up" dogs off puppy farmers with no questions asked but I think I can see why they do it. I think the problem is that they are not confident of anything actually been done about it if they turn these people in and they are scared of what might happen to the dogs if they don't take them. So what I think would help most in the long run is laws that make it easier to convict people running puppy farms and people actually being willing to chase these convictions and make them stick (with the dogs from closed down puppy farms being taken in by rescues such as the one mentioned). Sadly I think we're a long way off from anything like that happening. I also agree that rescues need to be a lot more flexible when rehoming dogs. A lot of dogs are left now whilst people are at work but I think if someone can satisfy the rescue that they have provisions in place (eg dog walker) if the dog will be left for say more than I dunno 7 hrs at a time routinely and the dog in question does not have separation issues then surely it is better for the dog to be in a loving home than sat in a kennel (a kennel that could be occupied by another needy dog)
 

PucciNPoni

Well-Known Member
Joined
23 March 2009
Messages
4,064
Sadly I think we're a long way off from anything like that happening. I also agree that rescues need to be a lot more flexible when rehoming dogs. A lot of dogs are left now whilst people are at work but I think if someone can satisfy the rescue that they have provisions in place (eg dog walker) if the dog will be left for say more than I dunno 7 hrs at a time routinely and the dog in question does not have separation issues then surely it is better for the dog to be in a loving home than sat in a kennel (a kennel that could be occupied by another needy dog)
I'm inclined to agree. I think I could offer, should I be looking (which I'm not) to rehome, a dog a good life. No, I don't go for lots of hill walks daily, and yes my dogs do get left at home while we're working. However, I do have "provisions" in place and my dogs are rather content to stay at home. They are well groomed, well fed, well loved. They are played with, stimulated and are very much spoiled as part of a family. And yet, the fosterer told me that I would be denied as a home for any from that rescue because they would be left during the day. It's a shame really, cos I know that there are many a good home like mine, that won't make the grade to a rescue.

And here's the kicker - I happen to know some of these dogs which HAVE gone on to new homes from that rescue. Some of these have become spoiled, clingy, whiney and obese! When they first went in to the homes, they didn't know to be clingy - and they never whined because the whinging was not "answered". None were over weight or over thin - but poor quality diet perhaps. Many didn't go to new homes and get a better quality food, just LOTS more of it. And yet these were "approved" homes. Hmmm, makes you wonder.
 

ester

Not slacking-multitasking
Joined
31 December 2008
Messages
56,876
Location
Cambridge
If rescues were not to happily take on the ex breeders from the puppy farm ilk I would guess that those involved would not have many qualms about PTS those that are no longer of any use. In that vein I don't think that rescues not taking on the older breeders would make any difference to the number being bred
 

joeanne

Well-Known Member
Joined
25 May 2008
Messages
5,322
Location
Cornwall
You are right ester....and it wouldnt involve a trip to the vets and a needle.....more a heavy brick and a pond, or if REALLY lucky a clean shot from a gun.
The "farmer" will replace his stock regardless....and a trip to the vets to dispose of old stock costs money, where as the charity are free (and the poor sods get a chance at a normal life, are presumably neutered so wont be adding anymore to the canine population).
 

CorvusCorax

I'm Dill Dandon
Joined
15 January 2008
Messages
49,928
Location
The shadows, apparently.
Not very stringent ones. The largest areas of supply would be Ireland and Wales.
The user Puppyalert on here runs a couple of blogs on the subject which highlight legislation, or lack therefore, which are worth sussing out.
She posted last week about a planning application in Wales which is aiming to house over 100 breeding bitches in one shed.

I have heard of proposed kennels in Scotland, where when asked how he would cope with the noise issue and nuisance to neighbours, the applicant told planners he would put an e-collar on every adult dog :( :( :(
 
Top