Rehoming Rescue Dogs - How To Enforce Desexing ?

[Steve]

rehoming dogs and puppies that are not desexed is not "rescue"

Agreed - there is no denying that there are risks associated with any operation but if you are calling these rescue then the risk is part of the situation they are in. If owners want a choice they should buy a pup form someone other than a person calling themselves rescue. If you want the choice you shouldnt be making statements as to their status as rescue dogs

[tdierikx]

I kinda thought that the reason for delay in desexing would have been age/weight... if the pups are under 8 weeks old and also under 1 kg, the risks are so much higher with any anaesthetic. I wouldn't have drawn the conclusion that the pups were in any way ill... their pics show some very cute and healthy looking little tykes... *grin*

A for calling these pups "rescues", the point is moot really - brutus was presented with a litter of pups the original owner wanted destroyed, convinced same that they should be given a chance, and has tried her very best to rehome them responsibly... well on her way to doing most of what other rescuers do IMHO.

You're doing a good thing brutus, OK?

T.

[WreckitWhippet]

I kinda thought that the reason for delay in desexing would have been age/weight... if the pups are under 8 weeks old and also under 1 kg, the risks are so much higher with any anaesthetic. I wouldn't have drawn the conclusion that the pups were in any way ill... their pics show some very cute and healthy looking little tykes... *grin*

A for calling these pups "rescues", the point is moot really - brutus was presented with a litter of pups the original owner wanted destroyed, convinced same that they should be given a chance, and has tried her very best to rehome them responsibly... well on her way to doing most of what other rescuers do IMHO.

You're doing a good thing brutus, OK?

T.

Sending them into the world undesexed is not a "good thing" no matter what situation they were saved from.

If the reason for not desexing was age and weight, then the responsible solution is to hang onto them longer, until they can undergo a GA for either neutering or vasectomy.

[tdierikx]

brutus has indicated that all pups will be desexed before they go to their new homes WreckitWhippet... all is looking good now, OK?

T.

[~Anne~]

I kinda thought that the reason for delay in desexing would have been age/weight... if the pups are under 8 weeks old and also under 1 kg, the risks are so much higher with any anaesthetic. I wouldn't have drawn the conclusion that the pups were in any way ill... their pics show some very cute and healthy looking little tykes... *grin*

A for calling these pups "rescues", the point is moot really - brutus was presented with a litter of pups the original owner wanted destroyed, convinced same that they should be given a chance, and has tried her very best to rehome them responsibly... well on her way to doing most of what other rescuers do IMHO.

You're doing a good thing brutus, OK?

T.

Sending them into the world undesexed is not a "good thing" no matter what situation they were saved from.

If the reason for not desexing was age and weight, then the responsible solution is to hang onto them longer, until they can undergo a GA for either neutering or vasectomy.

This kind of statement irks me. Yes, some dogs that are homed entire end up in situations that are not desirable, however that is a very small number overall. This whole concept of desex them to save them from cruelty is absurd logic. A desexed animal can also end up in situations of abuse and neglect.

Desex at all cost is not the answer.

In all the years I have been involved in rescue I am yet to see conclusive evidence to back up the desex everything is better argument.

Desexing young animals can cause health issues. Rehoming entire animals can cause abuse issues. The solution is finding the balance in each individual case.

[WreckitWhippet]

I never said desexing prevets cruelty and I don't buy into that line of thinking.

Desexing, vasectomy and tubal ligation prevents dogs from every being bred from. It's not "rescue" if all you are going to do is recycle entire dogs, bitches and pups back into the community.

[~Anne~]

What isn't it rescue though? How many entire dogs in the community are actually bred from, and if they are bred from, why is that an issue?

To be honest it seems to me that we have all become expert at not thinking, so much so that we've forgotten to look at what actually makes sense.

Why isn't it rescue to re-home a dog entire? Why do you consider it recycling? Does having a reproductive system intact mean that a dog will end up back in rescue?

Edited February 17, 2013 by ~Anne~

[Loving my Oldies]

Does having a reproductive system intact mean that a dog will end up back in rescue?

I think you are being a bit cute here, Anne. You know very well that the argument for desexing before rehoming is meant to prevent any unplanned (or planned ) litters with the possibility that they will be fodder for pounds.

[~Anne~]

Does having a reproductive system intact mean that a dog will end up back in rescue?

I think you are being a bit cute here, Anne. You know very well that the argument for desexing before rehoming is meant to prevent any unplanned (or planned ) litters with the possibility that they will be fodder for pounds.

I wouldn't call it cute, I'm actually trying to get people to think independently as I have for several years.

There is no evidence that desexing programs slow down the rate of dogs entering pounds.

There is evidence that desexing improves some health prospects and equally, there is evidence that desexing causing health issues. These two areas can be debated easily because the evidence is clear both ways. The same cannot be said for desexing and the rate of dogs entering pounds.

[Loving my Oldies]

LOL Anne. So because the vast majority of us believes totally in desexing before rehoming means we are not thinking independently. :laugh: :laugh:

However, if we go along with you, giving up our beliefs, that would be independence??

Too cute.

[~Anne~]

No, I'm not asking you to follow my beliefs. In fact I pretty sure I've not actually stated my beliefs or angled for anyone to take them in whatever they may be. I asked a few straight to the point questions and was hoping for some responses and discussion.

Over the years I've asked many similar questions. I've never yet received a logical response.

At first I queried because I wanted a rock solid argument to present to an authority about desexing animals prior to rehoming. I researched, I asked questions, I spoke to people and I came up with the very obvious and glaring fact that there is no foundation to the desexing argument. I'm still researching. I'm still asking questions.

I'll ask the question in a different way - what does desexing a rescue dog achieve?

Edited February 17, 2013 by ~Anne~

[Loving my Oldies]

I'll ask the question in a different way - what does desexing a rescue dog achieve?

Apart from my having answered that just a couple of posts ago, this has been answered a squillion times over the years: it means that that particular dog will not produce any more dogs. Simple as.

You say there is no evidence that desexing dogs reduces the numbers in the pound. Well where is your evidence against it?

Numbers alone will not prove anything except there are greater or lesser numbers. As with humans, there are probably more dogs in the world than 100 years ago, ergo there are likely to be more dogs, numerically, in pounds.

And there would be a damned sight more if dogs were not desexed.

[Her Majesty Dogmad]

I'll ask the question in a different way - what does desexing a rescue dog achieve?

Apart from my having answered that just a couple of posts ago, this has been answered a squillion times over the years: it means that that particular dog will not produce any more dogs. Simple as.

You say there is no evidence that desexing dogs reduces the numbers in the pound. Well where is your evidence against it?

Numbers alone will not prove anything except there are greater or lesser numbers. As with humans, there are probably more dogs in the world than 100 years ago, ergo there are likely to be more dogs, numerically, in pounds.

And there would be a damned sight more if dogs were not desexed.

Agree with DD here. Maybe those who do breed rescue see things differently - I do both and there's no way in the world that I will allow a rescue dog - pure or cross breed - to go out undesexed.

I'm an independent thinker by the way! Very independent in many ways and I don't rely on anyone else to tell me how to think or what to do. I do what is right, in my humble opinion. :)

[~Anne~]

I don't have the research links on my iPad, however they are there. I found 3 legitimate studies on the subject of desexing programs reducing the numbers of dogs entering shelters in the US. They show conclusive evidence that mass desexing programs failed to reduce the number entering the shelters. Two of those studies also included cats. There was a decline in cats in both.

The number of dogs overall is irrelevant as there isn't an oversupply of dogs. Again, evidence clearly shows this.

When I first began looking into desexing in rescue I wanted to prove the affirmative argument. I wanted to prove that dogs in rescues should be desexed. I initially held the view that any dog not being legitimately bred from should be desexed. However, I couldn't find facts to support that thinking. I found the opposite instead. I found evidence that either made my argument neutral or disproved it.

I don't want to see dogs being needlessly killed in pounds. I down want to see dogs being abused in breeding programs. I think it is a waste of time pushing agendas that are doomed to fail be use there is no evidence to support them. So I'll keep asking and challenging thinking. The left side of my brain as a rescuer says 'yes! Desex at all cost' but the right is saying 'why? What will that achieve.'

I firmly believe we've become so conditioned to think that desexing is the answer that we push it without thinking. I know that this was how it was for me and still is sometimes.

When the OP is re-homing the puppies she should be weighing up the risks of desexing (and the particular risks involved in desexing young dogs) vs the risk of rehoming an entire dog.

[Her Majesty Dogmad]

Well I'll tackle it from a practical rather than cerebral way - when I rehome unwanted dogs they will be living inside the house.

If you have desexed a dog, especially a male, you have a lot more chance of successfully housetraining the dog. It is very difficult to stop an entire male dog from marking if undesexed.

Now some might argue and perhaps they have been lucky but where I've taken male dogs from the pound and tried to housetrain them before they go to the vet (this may be because they are too thin to have surgery etc), I've never been lucky. The amount of wee has been enough to sink a battle ship and no amount of training input from me has changed that.

I should say that I've housetrained many rescue dogs over the last 10 years, including a 15 yr old that had never been inside a house and a dog that lived in a breeder's kennel for 9 years.

And as for females, yes, I've had more than one rescue dog come on heat. I've no idea why anyone would want stray male dogs coming from miles around. There's also the mess it makes and if you have other dogs, it can cause trouble.

In essence, what I'm saying is that apart from the risk of producing more puppies, there are behavioural issues aplenty that may prevent the undesexed dog from being the companion I envisage (and the masses want to adopt) when I rescue the dog.

There are also health problems too, I lost my beautiful GSD cross because she was old and I got her desexed but she had ovarian cancer. Only had her for 6 months and I was robbed of further happy years with one of the most lovely dogs I've ever rescued.

Edited February 17, 2013 by dogmad

[tdierikx]

I think that a lot of people look to adopt rescue dogs because all of the vet work is already done for them. They love that they aren't going to have to be responsible for desexing, etc. And they are usually pretty cheap to buy considering all the work that goes into ensuring that they are adoptable too.

T.

[Her Majesty Dogmad]

Just took a small female surrender on. Attacked by other female dog in the household last week. Neither dog was desexed.

She's got bite marks and wasn't taken to a vet ...

So many issues to think about with regards to NOT desexing. I won't do it. I also won't rehome where the existing pets are undesexed. Won't bore anyone with the reasons but above is one example of where it can go very wrong.

Edited February 17, 2013 by dogmad

[YOLO]

Have not heard of vasectomies being widely done in dogs, but I wish those misguided amateurs at the shelters would get hold of the idea. The health problems they cause by castrating dogs are substantial, well-documented, and completely outweigh any so-called benefits. At least with a vasectomy, they could cling to their myths about population control, but do minimal damage.

For the avoidance of doubt, let me be clear on this. Sterilising males does NOT control population. Go and talk to a farmer, in the business of breeding sheep or cattle. Ask him how many entire Rams or Bulls he keeps to serve his herd or flock.

If anything, it is worse with dogs. If you have an entire female on heat, and she is not secure, then if there is an entire male roaming within miles of your bitch he WILL find her.

[Blackdogs]

I have an almost seven year old entire male dog who has never had any health issues related to being entire. He has never attempted to escape the property to procreate and he has never mated. He is happy, well adjusted and healthy. I believe that population control has more to do with education than anything else.

[Christina]

I'll ask the question in a different way - what does desexing a rescue dog achieve?

Apart from the obvious that a desexed dog can't breed it can impact on a dogs behaviour & stop some things that may bother many owners. Not every dog but so many.

The males don't hump or pee on things. Not every entire male does this but its common.

The males don't try & escape to get to females on heat, which they can smell from afar.

The males are more malleable without all the testosterone. Less likely to fight.

The females don't hump, yes this happens in entire girls.

They don't leave blood around the place twice a year for a few weeks.

They don't attract male dogs.

You can take them out all year.

One can debate on the health issues forever but re the above people are not as tolerant of any hassle with pets & want to fix everything. Desexing fixes a lot.

Many entire dogs are fine with a certain type of owner but they are not the majority.