So Whats The Answer

[centitout]

I talked to potential new owners about my breeds requirements,suitability,problems etc until i was blue in the face.Many people came 2-3 times over a 6 week period when the pups are born,countless hours writing emails,phone calls etc,in many instances had to give up a weekends work to spend the day/s talking at length to owners.Gave comprehensive info packs,i turned more people away when their expectations of the breeds requirements werent realistic,BUT I STILL HAD DOGS COME BACK.Normally between 12-18 mths which is the period i talked to the new owners at length about.

Reasons given were-reduction of income,moving and cant have a dog,had a couple of more kids and the dog was too big,wanted to do SAR,but partner didnt like the dog and abused it.Generally i found the blokes loved the dogs,the partners did too UNTIL they grew out of the cute puppy stage/started to drool.Training was the other big one-despite telling them how much training a hound needs,they saw my adult dogs and expected the same in a pup-apparently pups come fully trained!!

One of the reasons i am not breeding anymore,am totally sick of unrealistic expectations of some owners and it is the dogs that suffer.One lady i spoke to for a year before she bought a pup,gave all the right answers but turned out to not have a clue,never trained the dog at all and then took off o/seas for 8 mths- I ended up back with the dog,gave her back her money(because when she returned,she wanted the dog back,never mind the 8 mths free boarding i did for her,feed,vet bills and training )

But on the other hand,i have had some awesome owners,they did make up for the crappy ones

[aussielover]

Megan:

I don't understand why they got one in the first place. From asking around (and this is all anecdotal of course) many people get dogs "for the kids" or to protect their family. They grew up with a dog and have fond memories. But they don't want one now. They feel guilty that their kids are missing out on something and so get one. Both parents often work 45+ hours a week, have kids sports, struggle with work/life balance and the dog is last on a very long list.

Megan, you raise an issue I've been musing on. I've lost track of the number of times I've heard people suggest that growing up with dogs somehow prepares them for dog ownership. IMO it doesn't. Kids don't generally deal with the responsibilities of dog ownership on a day to day basis - that's down to parents (or good ones anyway). Kids (especially young ones) don't toilet train, exercise, feed, deal with health issues etc. Memories of the family dog tend to be fairly rosy.

I'd suggest that growing up with a dog no more fully prepares you to be a dog owner than growing up with a family car prepares you to be a driver. The perspective and responsiblities are quite different.

That is so true!

Our family dog recently passed away and although she was probably less destructive and nuaghty than a lot of puppies, i did not have the main responsibility for her so i do not remember her being that much work at all. I walked her everyday and fed her everyday but that is not the same thing as fully owning a dog.

Now I have a puppy who is my responsibility completely and it is different- a lot of work physically and financially (although i only pay for toys and treats- guide dogs pays for food and vet stuff)

[Greytmate]

I talked to potential new owners about my breeds requirements,suitability,problems etc until i was blue in the face.Many people came 2-3 times over a 6 week period when the pups are born,countless hours writing emails,phone calls etc,in many instances had to give up a weekends work to spend the day/s talking at length to owners.Gave comprehensive info packs,i turned more people away when their expectations of the breeds requirements werent realistic,BUT I STILL HAD DOGS COME BACK.Normally between 12-18 mths which is the period i talked to the new owners at length about.

Reasons given were-reduction of income,moving and cant have a dog,had a couple of more kids and the dog was too big,wanted to do SAR,but partner didnt like the dog and abused it.Generally i found the blokes loved the dogs,the partners did too UNTIL they grew out of the cute puppy stage/started to drool.Training was the other big one-despite telling them how much training a hound needs,they saw my adult dogs and expected the same in a pup-apparently pups come fully trained!!

One of the reasons i am not breeding anymore,am totally sick of unrealistic expectations of some owners and it is the dogs that suffer.One lady i spoke to for a year before she bought a pup,gave all the right answers but turned out to not have a clue,never trained the dog at all and then took off o/seas for 8 mths- I ended up back with the dog,gave her back her money(because when she returned,she wanted the dog back,never mind the 8 mths free boarding i did for her,feed,vet bills and training )

But on the other hand,i have had some awesome owners,they did make up for the crappy ones

Screening homes is very difficult and nobody can get it 100% right.

There is a lot that could be done to improve people's screening skills though, if somebody was organised enough to collect all the info together and train the relevant people. (BTW, I don't have all the info )

If you could attend a short training course on effective ways to screen out unsuitable owners and adjust the expectations of potential good owners, possibly making them better new owners, would that make you think about breeding again?

[WreckitWhippet]

We've focused a lot on preventing an owner from dumping/surrendering a dog but haven't focused much on the "breeders" and how they can be helped or assisted to screen buyers.

Everyone has their own method and the longer you;ve been doing it the easier it is and the more liekly you are to know if you;ve been successfull. For new breeders starting out, screening can be hard work, it would be nice to have some basics in place for them.

[Greytmate]

We've focused a lot on preventing an owner from dumping/surrendering a dog but haven't focused much on the "breeders" and how they can be helped or assisted to screen buyers.

Everyone has their own method and the longer you;ve been doing it the easier it is and the more liekly you are to know if you;ve been successfull. For new breeders starting out, screening can be hard work, it would be nice to have some basics in place for them.

We have so much collective knowledge, good breeders and rescuers, even if we do all have slightly different ways to do things. It would be good if someone could collect all the good ideas together, as well as looking if there has been any research done to prove the effectiveness of certain techniques.

[Sheridan]

We've focused a lot on preventing an owner from dumping/surrendering a dog but haven't focused much on the "breeders" and how they can be helped or assisted to screen buyers.

Everyone has their own method and the longer you;ve been doing it the easier it is and the more liekly you are to know if you;ve been successfull. For new breeders starting out, screening can be hard work, it would be nice to have some basics in place for them.

I'd be curious to know if there are any breeders reading the thread who have never had a dog returned and how they screen their buyers. From Centitout's post, even her detailed process, one that to me sounds really good, isn't foolproof.

[Monah]

Centitout, that's so disappointing, I'm so sorry, I've always had huge admiration for you, and your lovely dogs

I'd love one and investigated many years ago, visited the breeder, yes from me, no from OH as there were ceilings covered in hanging drool (they did have MANY dogs) I was fine with it, being quite a pig... OH was not. so that was it as I do not believe in 'forcing' the issue, if one does not agree it WILL end in tears.....

GM, yes I know I should say more but I dont seem to have the skills to do so without sounding horrible...

I am in the midst of my 3rd letter to the editor this week in which I DO say exactly what I think..

Screening is very important, one rescue group here has had another dog returned, useless, I now have to educate some of them on screening, thought it would be common sense, cat hating dog...put in a home with a cat..

Then people like Cenitout cover all possibilities and STILL doesnt prevent rehoming.

My breeders were terrific (are) communicators and I saw the 'bad' with my own eyes (giant craters, eaten doors, HAIR..., excitability, leaping over the furniture, etc). ALthough we all like others to see our dogs behaving, I don't think it hurts to see the absolute worse either. IE, meet and greet in black clothes COVERED in hair?

It's like when people see revolting kids and KNOW that their angel will never do that... dog buyers have a puppy blind spot and when their perfect puppy is a 9 month old monster.....

Still cant think of any answers....my brain hurts.

[~Anne~]

We could never aim for a 100% success rate. The ideal would be a lot lower than what it currently is I guess. But what exactly is the current rate of ownership vs dump/surrender? Are we assuming it is bigger than it should be/could be? Common sense says it is, but is there any information gathered on this to show us how big/small the situation is?

[WreckitWhippet]

We've focused a lot on preventing an owner from dumping/surrendering a dog but haven't focused much on the "breeders" and how they can be helped or assisted to screen buyers.

Everyone has their own method and the longer you;ve been doing it the easier it is and the more liekly you are to know if you;ve been successfull. For new breeders starting out, screening can be hard work, it would be nice to have some basics in place for them.

I'd be curious to know if there are any breeders reading the thread who have never had a dog returned and how they screen their buyers. From Centitout's post, even her detailed process, one that to me sounds really good, isn't foolproof.

I've never had one come back and to the best of my knowledge no one has dumped their dog in a pound or rehomed it. I think it was more luck in the beginning but now I think I've got fit right. I have a few things that I go through and check off in the course of a conversation. I try and avoid any outright questions and those that I do ask, I keep as open questions.

You learn so much in the course of a conversation, just keep them talking and encourage them to expand on what they are telling you.

I encourage the contact and visits to meet the pups before they head for their new homes.

I talk about and provide as much information as I can before hand ( crate training, house training, feeding, kids and pets etc etc ). I think it's an awful lot for someone to take in from a puppy pack or during the time they collect their puppy. They should be armed with the info and preparing weeks in advance, where possible.

The one thing I do and I will never lie about or gloss over is explaining about the temperaments of the parents, grandparents and every dog I know that's in the lines and related. I freely admitt that my girls are nutters, they are high drive, high energy and if that's not what you want or think you can live with, then these aren't the pups/dogs for you.

Creating reasonable expectations is important. Staffords ( for example ) eat anything and everything, as youngsters and often their entire lives they are full on destruction machines. They eat and wreck your garden, furniture, car, door frames and anything that could and can be chewed. If you breed a breed that's not sedate, is prone to acting like a canon ball, backhoe or anything else, then potential buyers need to know the absolute worst of it.

Buyers need to make informed and educated decisions and it's the breeders job to make sure they have done that.

As I said previously, I have a pup that may be coming back to me. I'm working with the owner and if I can help them get through the current situation and keep their dog, it's win win all round. If the dog comes back to me, it's not the end of the world, it will be safe and rehomed.

I also said before, sending your dog back to the breeder or rehoming it responsibly should have no stigma attached.

Edited November 17, 2010 by ReadySetGo

[AmandaJ]

Microchip all pups

License all owners (including breeders) - with photographic 100pts id

Microchips only available (after a bedding in period) for pups and only to those who are licensed breeders - any others are reported.

Maintain a register of owners and transfer of ownership between breeder and owners (tracks ownership changes for council registration)

Any breaches of council dog control bylaws, dumping, surrendering without "trying" - results in loss of owners license - (can't buy any more dogs until certain conditions are met)

Any breeder registering large numbers of pups in a year comes under scrutiny (microchip records can do this)

Any vet treating an animal for a condition considered to be breeding related can have this noted on the register - when more than several problems arise from the same breeder they can be investigated and breeches can result in loss of license.

Just a thought.....

Microchip pups/dogs and owners. Link the chips ...

You want to make dog owners have to get microchip in themsleves...are you for real?

I didn't mean microchip people - I meant to have the chip linked to the breeder and successive owners for traceability...and accountability....but to do that owners need to be properly identified.

All the "fixes" can be done without new laws - they just need to use the laws they have properly and target the actual problem.....and EDUCATE JOE PUBLIC

[Monah]

We could never aim for a 100% success rate. The ideal would be a lot lower than what it currently is I guess. But what exactly is the current rate of ownership vs dump/surrender? Are we assuming it is bigger than it should be/could be? Common sense says it is, but is there any information gathered on this to show us how big/small the situation is?

I'd like to know some stats too. One thing I will guarantee. In our area there WILL a massive spike in dumpings from christmas to february.

[mita]

am totally sick of unrealistic expectations of some owners and it is the dogs that suffer.)

You deserve the prize for identifying the central issue, Centitout.

UQ research into the huge dumping rate, found that the reason which topped the list was that the the owners didn't think the dogs met their expectations. In other words, they had unrealistic expectations.

UQ must have translated that finding into their screening for adoption from the UQ Adoption Program. Because when we adopted a puss from there, their screening contained questions of the type, 'what would you do, when....' or 'what would you do, if...'. indicating the kinds of situations that happen in real life with real pets. Unlike someone's fantasy life, whipped up by the emotional excitement about getting a new pet.

Also the screening picked up on the fact that the best predictor of future behaviour is past behaviour. And the applicant's past history as a pet owner was sought, with documentation/evidence.

I also agree with Anne's comments. It's a matter of figuring out strategies which reduce the risk of dogs being dumped. In the complexities of the real world of human beings, it's necessary to work at risk reduction.

There's very helpful research findings to drawn on. Places like AWL Qld do this & it's the reason for their many insighful programs that specifically address the various risk factors associated with dogs being dumped.

Edited November 17, 2010 by mita

[Greytmate]

We could never aim for a 100% success rate. The ideal would be a lot lower than what it currently is I guess. But what exactly is the current rate of ownership vs dump/surrender? Are we assuming it is bigger than it should be/could be? Common sense says it is, but is there any information gathered on this to show us how big/small the situation is?

I'd like to know some stats too. One thing I will guarantee. In our area there WILL a massive spike in dumpings from christmas to february.

There have been some studies done on rehoming dogs.

We had a study done on our return rate when I coordinated GAP. I will quote the part of the study that talks about what has been learned about rehomed dogs being returned. It references other studies that have been done.

The Success of Canine Rehoming:

An Evaluation of the Greyhound Adoption Program (GAP)

Rosemary Elliott, Jenny-Ann Toribio and Denise Wigney

Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Sydney NSW 2006 Australia

The Success of Canine Rehoming:

An Evaluation of the Greyhound Adoption Program (GAP)

Rosemary Elliott, Jenny-Ann Toribio and Denise Wigney

Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Sydney NSW 2006 Australia

Abstract

The growing body of research on canine rehoming is focused on shelter dogs. There are currently no published studies evaluating greyhound rehoming schemes. This prospective study examined the success attained by the Greyhound Adoption Program or Greyhounds as Pets (GAP) in Australia and New Zealand. We followed 245 greyhounds adopted between February and June 2008, whose owners were sent a postal questionnaire four weeks after the adoption. Owners were asked to report on the frequency of specific behaviours they observed in their greyhounds during the first month and to rank the behaviours of most concern to them. Data on the post-adoptive return rate within this period were provided by GAP. There was a 78.8% response rate to the questionnaire, providing information on 193 greyhounds. This comprehensive baseline of behavioural ratings showed that anxiety reactions and predatory behaviours were the most frequently reported by owners of recently adopted greyhounds. Owners of 70.9% of the greyhounds nominated at least one behaviour of concern to them, with separation anxiety being the most frequently reported. Only a minority (29.2%) of owners with concerns about their dog’s behaviour telephoned GAP for advice. Eight greyhounds were returned within one month of adoption, giving a post-adoptive return rate of 3.3%, which is lower than reported in shelter dog studies with comparable follow-up periods.

Behavioural problems were the main reason for return. Seventeen greyhounds that were either returned due to behavioural problems or whose owners were considering returning them for this reason were compared with the rest of the sample to identify factors associated with risk of return. Certain factors were identified as significant trends, worthy of further investigation. The risk of return was increased by 3.3 times for dogs reported by their owners to have shown separation anxiety and by 4.3 times for dogs whose owners called GAP for advice about a behaviour of concern. Dogs were at lower risk of return when they fulfilled their owners’ expectations as companion animals, and when their owners had not underestimated the amount of work involved in caring for them. These findings suggest that greyhound adoption through GAP Australia and New Zealand has favourable success rates in the short term compared with the rehoming of shelter dogs, but a longer follow-up and larger sample size are required to draw firm conclusions. There is a need for GAP to provide more education and follow-up support to new owners regarding behaviours shown by greyhounds in the first month, particularly those such as separation anxiety, which may place their adoptions at risk.

Keywords: Greyhound; Canine; Dog; Rehoming; Adoption; Behaviour;

1. Introduction

The success of canine rehoming is a significant welfare issue given the vast number of stray or relinquished dogs needing homes and the stresses inherent to the shelter experience (Hennessy et al., 2001). Despite being screened for their suitability as pets, many adopted dogs are returned to shelters (Marston et al., 2005). Failed adoptions are a source of disappointment for new owners (Shore, 2005) and of ongoing stress for dogs (Diesel et al., 2008). These dogs may be subjected to further unsuccessful adoptions or lengthy stays in a shelter, both of which predispose them to a worsening of unacceptable behaviours (Tuber et al., 1999). Patronek et al. (1995) found that 50% of returned dogs are subsequently euthanased. Reported post-adoptive return rates range from 6.5% to as high as 50%, with a significant number of dogs returned within the first month (Borg et al., 1991) (Diesel et al., 2008) (Wells and Hepper, 2000). In a study of owners who returned their pets to the Humane Society of the United States, 54% of post-adoptive returns occurred within two weeks (Shore, 2005). Behavioural problems have been identified as the primary reason given by new owners for returning shelter dogs, although this is most likely to occur for serious problems such as aggression towards owners (Diesel et al., 2008) (Wells and Hepper, 2000).

To date, the research on canine rehoming has focused on shelter dogs and the literature lacks any formal evaluation of greyhound rehoming schemes. The Greyhound Adoption Program or Greyhounds As Pets (GAP) is an Australia and New Zealand-wide program that has been operating for more than ten years in some states and is devoted exclusively to rehoming racing greyhounds and promoting their suitability as pets. Comparable programs have been operating for longer in both the United Kingdom (Retired Greyhound Trust) and the United States, where there are over 200 greyhound adoption facilities. Despite the growing popularity of greyhounds as companion animals (Lord et al., 2007), there are no published studies evaluating the success of their rehoming or documenting the experiences of new owners.

One of the key welfare issues for greyhounds is the surplus of dogs and the limited capacity for their rehoming. Australia and New Zealand are the third largest producers of greyhound pups after the US and Ireland, with 3,373 litters whelped in the year ending 30 June 2007. Many of these 21,000 or more pups will not race, with 35-40% of whelped pups never receiving a registered racing name (www.galtd.org.au). Dogs that do have a racing career are generally retired by the age of five, or earlier if they develop injuries or perform suboptimally. The fate of both non-racing and retired dogs varies and has not been documented. Anecdotally, it is known that dogs not kept for breeding may be referred to GAP, given away privately, sold for export or relinquished to welfare organizations or veterinary clinics for euthanasia.

Greyhound Adoption Programs play a vital role in rehoming many greyhounds, both those who are retired and young dogs who have failed their pre-race training. In order to improve service and avoid multiple rehomings, GAP requires accurate data on the retention rates of dogs and information about risk factors for their return. In general, dogs acquired from rescue shelters or pet shops are more likely to display problematic behaviours than those acquired through breeders or private sources; for instance, the incidence of separation anxiety is particularly high among shelter dogs (Jagoe, 1994).

At this point, it is not known whether greyhounds adopted through GAP are prone to developing behaviors that place their adoptions at risk. GAP has strict selection criteria and does not accept dogs that have failed a pre-fostering assessment for health problems or behavioural issues such as high prey drive. Dogs are then fostered, being placed with temporary carers for between four and eight weeks before rehoming, to overcome socialization deficits that have resulted from kenneling, to assess their suitability as pets and to match them to suitable permanent homes.

The overall aim of this study was to evaluate the success of greyhound adoption in Australia and New Zealand attained by GAP. We sought to improve understanding of the unique needs of adopted greyhounds and their new owners and to support GAP to identify any areas of improvement for service delivery that might reduce post-adoptive dog returns. To achieve this aim we collected information from new owners about the frequency of specific behaviours they observed in their greyhounds during the first month and their ranking of behaviours of most concern to them. Further, we evaluated the effect of potential risk factors on greyhound return, including behavior problems and other variables known from the shelter dog literature to affect the success of canine adoption.

[centitout]

I too did all of that,even showed them some of the higher drive dogs .I know circumstances can change,and in those instances i am happy to bring the dog back and rehome.Little short of doing a police type interview i realy dont know what else to do,you do have to rely mostly on the honesty of the purchaser,as a breeder i was brutally honest about telling people what will happen if they dont train,socialise,how much excercise ,feeding etc.As i hadthe grandmother,siblings ,parents etc the new people were able to see the different personalities in that line.I drove a few times 200 kms each way to help a owner with training issues and also used to take him for "holidays"when her daughter developed medical issues.Sometimes i think breeders saying they will take back dogs leaves the owner with the easy option nowdays when the slightest event occurs,but thats what you have to do to guarantee the pups you breed are safe.

It comes back to society having a "throwaway"attitude,or pass the responsibility on .

I even gave talks/demos at the kids primary school,pet days and vet clinic on responsible pet ownership,and even random people that wanted to just pat the dogs on walks etc!

Their is no way a breeder can foresee that an owner will get a job transfer o/s,or that one will lie to get a pup now and then go o/s for months,or decide to have 2 more kids 3 mths after getting a pup that the husband had been wanting for 10 years-especially as her kids were 16+ at the time .

I even had people stay for weekends,meet adult dogs(without cute puppies around).And show people arent exempt from dumping dogs either,or having unrealistic expectations,so its not just the general public

[~Anne~]

Sorry, I was referring to abandoned/surrendered family dogs, not rescue/shelter dogs returned after re-homing.

How many pups/adult dogs that are sold to pet homes are abandoned, dumped or surrendered?

[centitout]

Forgot to add,i even lead trained all pups before they left,and the ones that picked them up personally had demos on it!

One of the things i heard from previous hound owners(not mine!) over the years was the dogs pulled the arms out of you-so i showed them how i walked 4 at a time on loose leads,and made sure my pups were taught to lead correctly before going,so that would never be an excuse for not excercising them.

[shel]

'Dumpage' rates and euthanasia rates are two quite separate issues.

There will always be a percentage of pets who for a myriad of reasons will not stay in their homes.

Sometimes its because the person is genuinely 'irresponsible', but if that is the case it is our job to recieve and protect pets from them. To suggest 'animal management' could fix a problem that is a reality of society (people aren't perfect; some drive without a licence, beat their kids, take drugs) is unrealistic.

But more often it is a good owner with a problem they see as insurmoutable. Their personal situation has changed (10-15 years is a long time - many marriages don't last that long!), or the pet was an incorrect choice, or the owner had problems they couldn't overcome. We need to focus on these factors; pet friendly housing, pet selection help and training and behavioural support... the more accessible these support systems are, the lower the surrender rate will be.

Although we don't give them much credit, most people are trying to do the right thing. If they're given the right support and tools we could get better outcomes.

Euthanasia rate is not tied to surrender rate. News today that twice as many people are adopting dogs as ten years ago DOUBLE! Smarter marketing, less blame culture, a more welcoming environment, a breakdown in the perception that rescue dogs are all 'abused', online tools and pounds who have moved shelters from being 'garbage disposal agents' to actually taking responsibility for finding new homes for the animals in their care.

We only need about an extra 250,000 homes each year for the shelters to be empty. 'They' reckon 10% of pets come from pet shops (and that number is about half a million), so we have 90% (4.5million per year) being purchased elsewhere. Shelters only need to grab 5% of that to have the 'problem' licked.

But the best thing? For both of these issues we don't have to speculate or guess.

There are communities who have solved the problem.

Calgary has a 90-95% dog licensing compliance rate (most Australian councils sit around 50-60%) and 94% of the dogs AND CATS who enter their system come out alive. They also saw in 2008, the lowest number of aggressive dog incidents they’ve had in over 25 years.

Every dollar that they raise from animal licensing (and fines for non-compliance) go back into funding animal control — not back into the city’s slush fund. So with an operating budget of $3.5-4.0 million, they are able to really do some things right with their animal control department.

They strongly encourage all people who license their dogs to also have them microchipped (which allows the dogs to be scanned and the owner determined immediately). Every animal control vehicle is equipped with a scanner — so if they find a stray dog, the animal control officer can instantly scan the dog for the chip, and deliver the dog home free of charge (although there are fines if your dog becomes a frequent flyer).

This home delivery a) is a service for people who obey the rules and b) saves money in animal control costs because stray dogs seldom even make it to their shelter. They are returned home where the dog belongs. The city then doesn’t incur the costs of putting the dog in the shelter, maintaining the dog while it’s in the shelter, food etc. Bruce’s goal for next year is to gett 50% of the dogs returned directly home without ever reaching the shelter.

If a dog does end up making it to the shelter, its photo is taken immediately and placed on their webpage within 15 minutes of the dog reaching the shelter. All the dogs in the shelter are treated for the basic diseases – -and if a dog is found injured, animal control will take the dog to a vet. The vets treat the dogs because a) animal control is usually able to find the owner of the dog because they’re all licensed and b) if they don’t, animal control will cover the medical costs associated with treating that dog. Wow.

Calgary built a new shelter for their animals about 5-8 years ago that is state of the art…and has never been filled to its capacity.

Calgary also focuses a lot of its energies on education and encouraging responsible dog ownership. They have a full time staff member, that is trained in education, that puts together a public education program. They have six specific programs that are part fof their public school’s curriculum that emphasizes respect for living things.

Calgary also has 140 dedicated off-leash areas for dogs — so that’s 140 “dog parks”. Kansas City, MO is struggling to find a way to get a second one. These off-leash areas provide a ton of areas for socialization for the dogs to learn how to interact with other dogs and other people.

The net results of their efforts have been impressive. Over the past 18 years, the city of Calgary has cut their number of dog bites and chases by more than 50% (all the while, the human and dog population of Calgary has doubled). Last year calgary only had to euthenize 256 animals (Kansas City, KS alone euthenized 5,000 DOGS last year, the KC metro area kills in the neighborhood of 40,000 dogs and cats each year). Almost all of the euthenizations came from dogs that had behavioral or health issues. Bruce estimates that Calgary will become a true no-kill city within the next 3-5 years.

They've done it without BSL, restricting ownership, pet number limits, ownership licences or mandatory desexing.

Because their community see them as a resource, not someone 'out to get them', there is an enormous amount of trust. You just can't get that if people are hiding their pit bulls or their 'extra' pet.

They come down hard on people who do the wrong thing, but all their staff are trained in mediation so they use it as a chance to bring about change in owner behaviour, not just deem the owner 'irresponsible' and wait for something bad to happen. They also take proactive action; if you register four large breeds for example, they'll come around for a chat to make sure you know how to care for them appropriately.

This video is long, but it outlines their whole program and approach:

** edited for spelling **

Edited November 17, 2010 by shel

[Greytmate]

Sorry, I was referring to abandoned/surrendered family dogs, not rescue/shelter dogs returned after re-homing.

How many pups/adult dogs that are sold to pet homes are abandoned, dumped or surrendered?

You would have to find a study done that was following up dogs obtained from those sources. Are there breeders or organisations that have followed up and collected data from the people that have bought their dogs?

I would think that the reason would be basically the same wherever the dog was obtained from. It no longer met the owner's expectations, or the owner was not prepared for the commitment.

There has to be a reason why some breeders have a lot more success than others though, maybe even different breeds have different success rates, and that isn't the breeder's fault.

Ready Set Go, post as much info as you like, hopefully everyone can pick up ideas.

It would also be good to hear from breeders that have done things that have improved their rate.

[~Anne~]

(oops, sorry, I was clapping at Shel's post)

Thanks Greytmate. I too would love to hear from breeders who have collected data.

Edited November 17, 2010 by ~Anne~

[Steve]

Ive had three beagles and 2 Maremmas in 35 years.