Why dont people get dogs from rescues?!

We have had 3 pedigree dogs in the past at different times but when our last one died i wanted to get a rescue. Our first bitch puppy was 8 weeks old which we got from the RSPCA, and 4 years later we got an approx 6 months old dog puppy from the same people, because i was told by several dog people that the best mix is a dog and a bitch rather than 2 bitches. All though we are experienced dog owners our two dogs both have issues, and we dont let our present dogs and our small grandchildren get to close unless we give them constant supervision. I know you should do this with all dogs and children, but we need to do it more so with these two.

We didn't see the mothers of our 2 dogs at the RSPCA even though the mother of our bitch so we were told was there, i asked to see her but was told we couldn't. (I wonder why?)

I would next time like to have an old dog, to give a home to a dog that really needs a home that is not likely to get one because of their age. But whether a rescue centre would let us because we have grandchildren, i suppose i would have to find out at the time.

From experience i personally wouldn't rehome a puppy to anyone with young children, because you dont know how that puppy was bred and what the temperament of the mother is, which i think is important. So i do understand why people go to a breeder and not a rescue, but of course there are good breeders and bad breeders out there, but that's another post which i wont get into on here.
 
jools1234 said:
for all of you discussing reputable breeders of pedigree dogs-i do not want a pedigree dog, the kennel club have a lot to answer for and many breeder have breeds that follow the breed standard but the breed standard and in/line breeding is what causes the problems that you are talking about good breeders testing for-its a bit circular for my liking

examples

cavaliers with skulls too small for the brain

bull dogs that cannot give birth with cesarian (how that can ever be classed as responsible breeding i do not know)

breeds that cannot breath properly

those with inherited heart conditions

hip and elbow displaysia in many many breeds

skin problems in westies, poodles, bassetsetc etc etc

what i am saying is all the inherited problems were created by breeding to a standard (pedigree), i agree good breeders are trying to do something about it and that the designer breeds (1st crosses) often have problems from one or both sides of their gene pool, but maybe the only responsible way to breed would be to stop breeding pedigrees/to a standard and breed for purpose

dogs bred for purpose would be your lurchers and working (not pedigree) terriers, these dogs rarely have health problems,

this is 'a cat among the pidgeons' post i am aware of that, but my mutts have always been healthy but i have never had a first cross or pedigree and i dont think i ever would[/QUOTE



Papers are irrelevant to me but the ones I get have them but working family's are what I look for working parents is what I am looking for it it just at the top end of that market they always seem to have papers.
Click to expand...
 
s4sugar said:
Have you ever dealt with a breeder? A real breeder with a love for the breed?


The links you post are to a puppy farm outlet not to a breeder. If people could be educated to stop buying the products of these places then fewer dogs would be in rescue.
Click to expand...

my thoughts exactly.

oh and if anyone ever finds a Shiba inu in a general rescue then please let me know as i would be very interested,:)
 
Well said Jools123!

My OH buys puppies as wants working dogs. My dogs are pets so any dog will do, although I have breeds I prefer.

Thank god the kennel club haven't got hold of proper terriers yet and ruined them!!
 
Some breeders are trying to breed for health. Many are using all the genetic testing currently on offer and are happy to breed crosses which in theory despite there being a potential for faulty genes to be passed on it is opening the gene pool gradually. Not all are inbreeding to produce extreme "types" irrespective of health.

I am not planning to go into loads of detail about my experiences in rescue, but maybe it would help to see why some people become demoralised with the whole dog rescue scene. I was heavily involved in fostering, assessment and home checking for a number of well established rescues. Some were fantastic, many I am afraid were not. Some dogs I had assessed as unsuitable with small furries or children went on to be homed irrespective of these issues and most were returned following nasty incidents. Some rescues had also extremely restrictive policies for adopters that did not apply to us fosterers. I worked part time and the foster dogs were more than happy with this, yet good people/homes where being turned away for working more than 4hrs. The worst I came across was a rescue that did not believe in de-flea, worming, inocculating etc... I was given a pack of homeopathic remedies with the dog when it arrived and was not expecting this. The dog had severe intermale aggression (with referred aggression) and they would not neuter due to costs and still expected the dog to be rehomed as was - apparently fine to go with other animals and children. Basically I paid to have the dog neutered, they then refused permission for the dog to receive any pain relief and wanted me to use a new little homeopathic bottle. Needless to say the dog was given metcam, de-flead, wormed, vaccinated and eventually rehomed to someone I found with the correct experience. I never fostered for them again and also voiced concerns to the RSPCA about the rescue in question (not the RSPCA itself or anything affiliated with it) regarding the stance on medication/pain relief.

I now work with cats protection and avoid the dog rescue scene which I suppose is a shame, but I just had enough. I enjoy working with the cats and this charity, and I have a cross breed dog from a breeder rather than rescue as I just felt more comfortable with this at the time.

I guess what I am trying to say is not all breeders are bad and not all rescues are good, you get extremes in both groups - it is not a clear cut issue but TBH a bit of a minefield.
 
Last edited:
We could not because OH is in the army and majority of rescue centres that I phoned and visited said no because of this. The fact that we are in our own home and he is no longer deployable seemed to cut no ice with the ones we approached. But through lovely lady here on H&H forum we went to very nice breeder and have our lovely GSD who I am now going to agility classes with.
 
SadKen said:
I absolutely concur with this but I think some folks will buy puppies without having the funds for injections etc, because they want a puppy. I'm certainly not defending that - please don't think I am - it's a tragedy and ultra-selfish. Was just wondering in my post above whether this is partly why they buy a puppy rather than rescuing though, which perpetuates the cycle.
Click to expand...

Decent breeder will microchip and do their vaccinations that should be part of the responsibility of the breeder not just the new owner. Always a bug bear of mine given the cost some puppies go for.
 
Goldenstar said:
jools1234 said:
for all of you discussing reputable breeders of pedigree dogs-i do not want a pedigree dog, the kennel club have a lot to answer for and many breeder have breeds that follow the breed standard but the breed standard and in/line breeding is what causes the problems that you are talking about good breeders testing for-its a bit circular for my liking

examples

cavaliers with skulls too small for the brain

bull dogs that cannot give birth with cesarian (how that can ever be classed as responsible breeding i do not know)

breeds that cannot breath properly

those with inherited heart conditions

hip and elbow displaysia in many many breeds

skin problems in westies, poodles, bassetsetc etc etc

what i am saying is all the inherited problems were created by breeding to a standard (pedigree), i agree good breeders are trying to do something about it and that the designer breeds (1st crosses) often have problems from one or both sides of their gene pool, but maybe the only responsible way to breed would be to stop breeding pedigrees/to a standard and breed for purpose

dogs bred for purpose would be your lurchers and working (not pedigree) terriers, these dogs rarely have health problems,

this is 'a cat among the pidgeons' post i am aware of that, but my mutts have always been healthy but i have never had a first cross or pedigree and i dont think i ever would[/QUOTE



Papers are irrelevant to me but the ones I get have them but working family's are what I look for working parents is what I am looking for it it just at the top end of that market they always seem to have papers.
Click to expand...

thats a fair comment and many working dogs bred from prodominantly working lines for there ability to work are not so afflicted by inherant problems-maybe this is due to survival of the fittest you cannot work a dog with c**p hips for many years so they dont get bred from in more prolific breeds but in some the breeding has been so poor that even in working breeds there are not enough healthy stock to breed from. gordon setters would be my examplee here, they cannot compete in trials till 2yrs i believe and many are crippled due to their hips by 4 or 5yrs of age i think that is cruelty in itself as many live to 10yrs plus and pedigree breeding has produced a brain that needs to work with a body that cantfor over half of many dogs lives
Click to expand...
 
horseloaner said:
Decent breeder will microchip and do their vaccinations that should be part of the responsibility of the breeder not just the new owner. Always a bug bear of mine given the cost some puppies go for.
Click to expand...

final primary vaccinations should not be done before 10 wks and most puppies go at 8wks-if i was getting a puppy i would want to do vaccs myself so i know what one is used some have more potential side effects than others-but yes i do think this should be reflected in price
 
Because many rescues seem to be of the opinion that having a dog kenneled for 23 hours a day is a preferable life to minor issues that can be worked with like

the potential owner working.
the potential owner having another pet.
the potential owner having children.
the potential owner being willing to allow the dog to go outside in a garden for some of the day.
the potential owner not wanting an aggressive or serious problem dog.

I have seen rescues keep incredibly dangerous dogs with serious aggression and behavioral issues alive, as it seemed they were living in cookoo land about the dogs behavior and how fixable it is and then try to downplay those issues to prospective new home.
I have no faith in some of the bigger rescues to re-home safe/relatively sane dogs to those people who do manage to fit through all their hoops. Which is a pity as in some areas they do incredible work. But I would rather take my chances and take a dog from the pound then rely on some organisations behaviorist assessed dogs. Perhaps I just came across a bad batch though?

The rescues who foster out their dogs to homes are somewhat better as the have seen the dogs in home environments and some of the breed rescues do seem to have their heads screwed on but again so many hoops to jump through!

A home check and a conversation on what their plan for the dogs daily activities, taken with a bit of common sense, should be be enough to decide if a person can adopt or not. This sheet filling and box ticking exercise just sends people to the puppy farmers and backyard breeders.

That and the fact that some of the rescue people push the rescue agenda so hard that it gets peoples back up and makes them come across as very self righteous and that only they care about the animals.That is very irritating and puts me off supporting them as well.

That said I do have a lot of time for rescues most of the time, most I have dealt/worked with do fantastic work in an area where the constant welfare battle can be heartbreaking and frustrating so I think I am just a bit irritable and seeing the worst in them at the moment.
 
hollieeb said:
Its an interesting point and as I said I am not an expert in specific breeds. I did however see a documentary once showing how rare breeds have a lot of health problems because somewhere a long the line they have been inbred. and by carrying on breeding these dogs it will get worse and worse
Click to expand...

Which rare breeds did you see this documentary on? I own very rare large-breed dogs and this breed are very healthy dogs with very few problems.

I hope you now have a better understanding of why people do not always buy from rescue centres given the many valid responses you've had :)
 
Spring Feather said:
Which rare breeds did you see this documentary on? I own very rare large-breed dogs and this breed are very healthy dogs with very few problems.


I also own a very rare breed, like Murphys Minder she is a Lancashire Heeler they are also on the vunerable breed list. They are a very Healthy breed and our pup was fully health tested, there is somone on here (cant remember their name) who owns a very old one and that is not unusual. Surprisingly enough there are about 4 on our breed rescue site, 2 were rescued from Ireland and the others are from breeders who dont health test their dogs and dont adhere to the Lancashire Heeler code of Ethics.

2 of my previous Dobes were private rehomes but my current 2 are from a breed rescue, I found Dobermann Welfare to be very thorough checking me and with the house check but they were also flexible and listened to me.

Any person who breeds should health test their dog and offer to have the dogs back, as one breeder said to me last night we bring them into the world and our responsibilities are for the whole of that dogs life. Dobermanns are known for large litters and in the 15yrs he has been breeding he has had 2 dogs back which he had no problem rehoming. If all breeders took this stance there would be no rescues but until we all live in Utopia we have to deal with the breeder who breeds for money not the breed.
Click to expand...
 
Goldenstar said:
jools1234 said:
for all of you discussing reputable breeders of pedigree dogs-i do not want a pedigree dog, the kennel club have a lot to answer for and many breeder have breeds that follow the breed standard but the breed standard and in/line breeding is what causes the problems that you are talking about good breeders testing for-its a bit circular for my liking

examples

cavaliers with skulls too small for the brain

bull dogs that cannot give birth with cesarian (how that can ever be classed as responsible breeding i do not know)

breeds that cannot breath properly

those with inherited heart conditions

hip and elbow displaysia in many many breeds

skin problems in westies, poodles, bassetsetc etc etc

what i am saying is all the inherited problems were created by breeding to a standard (pedigree), i agree good breeders are trying to do something about it and that the designer breeds (1st crosses) often have problems from one or both sides of their gene pool, but maybe the only responsible way to breed would be to stop breeding pedigrees/to a standard and breed for purpose

dogs bred for purpose would be your lurchers and working (not pedigree) terriers, these dogs rarely have health problems,

this is 'a cat among the pidgeons' post i am aware of that, but my mutts have always been healthy but i have never had a first cross or pedigree and i dont think i ever would[/QUOTE



Papers are irrelevant to me but the ones I get have them but working family's are what I look for working parents is what I am looking for it it just at the top end of that market they always seem to have papers.
Click to expand...


Well said! The Kennel Club is, in my opinion, one of the most vile organisations on the planet and has a HELL of a lot to answer for. They were hilarious when I refused to pay £25 to "register" my new Dane with them. I asked them why I needed to register him, they told me it was in case I decided to show him in the future. I assured them that I would never, EVER attend anything run by or benefitting the Kennel Club, and that even if I was deluded enough to think that they were doing a good job, I have a Harlequin Mis-mark, which isn't a "proper" colour anyway, so couldn't be shown. I was furious that they wanted me to pay £25 to say that the dog belonged to me. I'd already paid £700 for that privilege thank you!

Grrr.... I need to go and calm down. I get rather irate when I get started on the KC!
Click to expand...
 
The only congenital defect any of ours ever suffered from was stupidity...

IMAG0518.jpg


He was lying on apples!
 
We got our first dog from a rescue, advertised as fine with young children which he was, and cats which he was not. Also could be vicious which we did not find out until we had him for a few weeks when we could not bear to send him back. Rescue dogs sometimes have traits that noone knows about and take time and patience which not everyone can deal with especially when mixing the dog with family and horses thats why we got a puppy second time round. Would only get another rescue when i am retired and have lot more time
 
I think that many rescues have a lot to learn!

I wanted a GSD, went to a rescue, was prepared to take on a problem dog, ancient lady came to inspect - told I was unsuitable because we had sheep!
Excuse me but they are German SHEPHERD dogs ...........

My other who is in her 90s, had to have her dog PTS not long after my father died. She was lonely and wanted another dog. Try getting one from a rescue! The exercise was no problem as my sister would walk it when she walked her dogs twice a day and should anything happen to Mum then either sister or I would home the dog.
Not one rescue would entertain the idea.
I did fine her an English Pointer from the Oldies Rescue, he was put at about 10 years old and had been from pillar to post over the last three years.
They were sensible in vetting Mum, took my word that the dog would be well cared for in all respects and it really is a match made in heaven. The dog adores Mum and she him. They live fir each other.
 
jools1234 said:
final primary vaccinations should not be done before 10 wks and most puppies go at 8wks-if i was getting a puppy i would want to do vaccs myself so i know what one is used some have more potential side effects than others-but yes i do think this should be reflected in price
Click to expand...

Absolutely right about the time but its a very good excuse to get all the puppies and the owners together again which is an opportunity to check that all the puppies are getting what they need and that the owners don't need a little more help or advice with feeding, training or issues in the home. Not easy if your puppies are spread far and wide but its not impossible either. Alternative you can refund the cost of vaccination if provided with a vet invoice.

If breeder and owner have it right then a discussion would take place if there is a preference in vaccination especially for some breeds where there are immune issues after vaccinations have been given.
 
horseloaner said:
Absolutely right about the time but its a very good excuse to get all the puppies and the owners together again which is an opportunity to check that all the puppies are getting what they need and that the owners don't need a little more help or advice with feeding, training or issues in the home. Not easy if your puppies are spread far and wide but its not impossible either. Alternative you can refund the cost of vaccination if provided with a vet invoice.

If breeder and owner have it right then a discussion would take place if there is a preference in vaccination especially for some breeds where there are immune issues after vaccinations have been given.
Click to expand...

yes great ideas- some breeders at work do this sort of thing not many though-in fact only one,they give discount to local good homes too so they can stay in touch
 
Starzaan said:
Goldenstar said:
Well said! The Kennel Club is, in my opinion, one of the most vile organisations on the planet and has a HELL of a lot to answer for. They were hilarious when I refused to pay £25 to "register" my new Dane with them. I asked them why I needed to register him, they told me it was in case I decided to show him in the future. I assured them that I would never, EVER attend anything run by or benefitting the Kennel Club, and that even if I was deluded enough to think that they were doing a good job, I have a Harlequin Mis-mark, which isn't a "proper" colour anyway, so couldn't be shown. I was furious that they wanted me to pay £25 to say that the dog belonged to me. I'd already paid £700 for that privilege thank you!

Grrr.... I need to go and calm down. I get rather irate when I get started on the KC!
Click to expand...

So you just paid £700 for a pedigree dog and refused to register it?? Did you ever consider that there is more to registration than just showing? For an example the BRS is used to keep an eye on who is breeding and how many (rescues certainly use them) and unregistered dogs just bump another few off the list so breeders who breed back to back can get away with it, or those who breed more than the number of litters allowed get away with it. There is also the possibility of health testing, most require your KC registration and microchip number for your dogs information to be registered, information that goes on to assist the breed. The fact you have a harlequin mismark is important to the breed records. What happens if one your littermates has a serious health condition? Without your contact details they have no way to get in contact with you... there is more to registration than showing!

£25 is pretty steep though re-registration is £10, Activity Register is £12 Transfer to a new owner is £15 where did you get your price from???

I've never known the KC to ask you to register a dog usually its the other way around the breeder or the owner asks them to register and you are charged accordingly. The price does increase if you ask for a copy of the BRS or an enhanced pedigree certificate.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
horseloaner said:
Starzaan said:
So you just paid £700 for a pedigree dog and refused to register it?? Did you ever consider that there is more to registration than just showing? For an example the BRS is used to keep an eye on who is breeding and how many (rescues certainly use them) and unregistered dogs just bump another few off the list so breeders who breed back to back can get away with it, or those who breed more than the number of litters allowed get away with it. There is also the possibility of health testing, most require your KC registration and microchip number for your dogs information to be registered, information that goes on to assist the breed. The fact you have a harlequin mismark is important to the breed records.

£25 is pretty steep though re-registration is £10, Activity Register is £12 Transfer to a new owner is £15 where did you get your price from???
Click to expand...

When I bought my CKCS, the breeder advised me not to bother registering him with the KC, as we were getting him for a pet and had no intentions of breeding/showing :confused:

Despite all the negative publicity about Cavs, my wee dog is 12 years old and still full of health. I chose a safe family dog that didn't need lots of exercise as I had young children at the time and he does exactly what it says on the tin.

His breeder is well known in the local area and produces lovely, distinctive little dogs carefully bred to avoid the known breed defects.

Personally, I am far more judgmental of people that choose unsuitable dogs, especially when they have young children, than those that select an appropriate breed and have a friend and family member for life:)
Click to expand...
 
jools1234 said:
for all of you discussing reputable breeders of pedigree dogs-i do not want a pedigree dog, the kennel club have a lot to answer for and many breeder have breeds that follow the breed standard but the breed standard and in/line breeding is what causes the problems that you are talking about good breeders testing for-its a bit circular for my liking

examples

cavaliers with skulls too small for the brain

bull dogs that cannot give birth with cesarian (how that can ever be classed as responsible breeding i do not know)

breeds that cannot breath properly

those with inherited heart conditions

hip and elbow displaysia in many many breeds

skin problems in westies, poodles, bassetsetc etc etc

what i am saying is all the inherited problems were created by breeding to a standard (pedigree), i agree good breeders are trying to do something about it and that the designer breeds (1st crosses) often have problems from one or both sides of their gene pool, but maybe the only responsible way to breed would be to stop breeding pedigrees/to a standard and breed for purpose

dogs bred for purpose would be your lurchers and working (not pedigree) terriers, these dogs rarely have health problems,

this is 'a cat among the pidgeons' post i am aware of that, but my mutts have always been healthy but i have never had a first cross or pedigree and i dont think i ever would
Click to expand...

ummm... in/line is a type of rollerskate ;) Line breeding is a method used to produce a standard line. Outcross matings are used to bring in new attributes and despite what everyone goes on about can bring in just as many problems as in breeding because your introducing new genetics to an otherwise known line. In breeding which is what you are thinking about is using close relatives to cement a trait within a line. In breeding is now something no longer allowed by the KC one of the big steps forward that has been made recently.

A mutt/heinz 57/ or any other fancy name you choose to give it is basically where someone has allowed their dog or has intentionally bred to produce puppies with no thought for the welfare of their dog or its offspring. As there is no record of what diseases and health issues mutts/heinz 57 have how you anyone say that they are healthier.... except the RSPCA who are desperately looking for homes??? At least with a pedigree steps are being made to improve them and their health with the new tests available but the vast majority are specific by breed... so you can't test a mutt as its not a breed. Therefore it is not health tested, why is that better than a pedigree???
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top