Rehoming Rescue Dogs - How To Enforce Desexing ?

[_PL_]

Yikes why do things need to be so intellectual. Things that look great on paper like there's no oversupply of dogs......break it down and there absolutely is an oversupply of certain types of dogs. Or maybe just an undersupply of storage while they're waiting for the homes that facts tell us are out there.

Desexing, fine some people own entire dogs that's their business.

Rescue: apart from the fact that all the big name welfare organisations have been doing it since forever, it's still regarded as the bare minimum for a reason. Such as the list above by Christina. Then there's the surprise news that we don't all live in a happy clappy no-kill land majority populated by proactive animal lovers.

So leave that bull arab female entire when you rehome her, with no oversupply of dogs those 12 babies will be fine right? Of course, evidence/proof/studies and stats said so.

And I can find a couple of greyhounds around somewhere, no reason to desex, they seem so popular!

[Nic.B]

Yes, there are many benefits of desexing. I would never, ever send out a rescue entire.

While there is no evidence to support the fact that desexing reduces the number of dogs arriving in shelters.

If you look at VIC where all shelters must desex prior to rehome the stats are off as all other avenues of breeding/selling are not required to desex.

If all avenues of sale desexed, you would see a reduction in shelters. (Not talking RB's BTW)

I have seen six month old females leave the shelter entire, only to be returned after a litter. They keep one female, sell the rest and bring back Mum Others come back after their first season in whelp or with their puppies. It does happen quite freqently.

By desexing, you can become part of the solution rather than contribute to the problem of unwanted/unplanned litters and or unreputable breeding.

There is quite a lot of info on early age desexing both in the US and Aust. All puppies I have rescued/fostered have been desexed early, they hardly skip a beat, little bugs :)

[Nic.B]

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.

And how exactly do you suggest councils and shelters pay for vasectomies? My understanding is that the procedure is far more expensive.

Shelter staff are not misguided nor amateurs, I have met the most incredible shelter staff from all over the country.

Have you ever worked or volunteered in a shelter? I gather not from your comments, perhaps you should, either that or keep your stupid misguided comments to yourself!

[_PL_]

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.

And how exactly do you suggest councils and shelters pay for vasectomies? My understanding is that the procedure is far more expensive.

Shelter staff are not misguided nor amateurs, I have met the most incredible shelter staff from all over the country.

Have you ever worked or volunteered in a shelter? I gather not from your comments, perhaps you should, either that or keep your stupid misguided comments to yourself!

And the vets, they are amateurs as well remember Nic. We're clearly up against rock solid logic. I hope you now doubt the evidence of your own eyes.

[julesluvscavs]

I was disappointed to see on a local lost/found/rehoming fb page (run by someone at one of our local vets) yesterday, that they had done a post on behalf on some one who it sounds like rehomes... (not sure if it was a rescue organisation or just some person doing it on their own ?) but they were looking for a home for young kelpie, not desexed and it was being given away I left a reply under it that surely they should be desexing it first, which the person who runs the page said they would look into it (probably just to keep me quiet !)

We have enough BYB that goes on in our area as it is and people looking for entire free dogs!

Just hopefully it ends up in a responsible good home !

Edited March 7, 2013 by Jules❤3Cavs

[Nic.B]

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.

And how exactly do you suggest councils and shelters pay for vasectomies? My understanding is that the procedure is far more expensive.

Shelter staff are not misguided nor amateurs, I have met the most incredible shelter staff from all over the country.

Have you ever worked or volunteered in a shelter? I gather not from your comments, perhaps you should, either that or keep your stupid misguided comments to yourself!

And the vets, they are amateurs as well remember Nic. We're clearly up against rock solid logic. I hope you now doubt the evidence of your own eyes.

Nope, those on the ground and on the front line see it all as you know :)

[Nic.B]

I was disappointed to see on a local lost/found/rehoming fb page (run by someone at one of our local vets) yesterday, that they had done a post on behalf on some one who it sounds like rehomes... (not sure if it was a rescue organisation or just some person doing it on their own ?) but they were looking for a home for young kelpie, not desexed and it was being given away I left a reply under it that surely they should be desexing it first, which the person who runs the page said they would look into it (probably just to keep me quiet !)

We have enough BYB that goes on in our area as it is and people looking for entire free dogs!

Just hopefully it ends up in a responsible good home !

I hope so Jules, HP now desex thank god though the number of times people come in to find a breeding male or female is a nightmare. Then there are those who believe a female has to have at least one litter prior to desex.

Seriously, they stand in front of you and clearly state it with 80 impounded dogs around them!

[Greytmate]

If people want to breed dogs they need to pay the price and buy a registered dog to breed with. They need to buy a dog from a breeder.

Why should rescue be involved with a steady supply of potential breeding dogs? This is not rescue's thing at all.

Breeders need to produce dogs that are of correct temperament and correct genotype and phenotype to suit their market. And they charge a high price for that, rightfully so.

Rescue needs to supply good pet temperament dogs of sound phenotype to suit their market and they charge accordingly. No effort is put by rescuers into selecting appropriate dogs for breeding, and so they should not be supplying them to the public or potentially taking business away from dog breeders. It's unethical.

[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.

And how exactly do you suggest councils and shelters pay for vasectomies? My understanding is that the procedure is far more expensive.

Shelter staff are not misguided nor amateurs, I have met the most incredible shelter staff from all over the country.

Have you ever worked or volunteered in a shelter? I gather not from your comments, perhaps you should, either that or keep your stupid misguided comments to yourself!

As I SAID, I have “not heard of vasectomies being widely done in dogs.”

I don’t know whether it is more expensive, I can’t see why it would be, unless the alternative castration process is being performed by unqualified staff? Maybe ask a vet.

Not really the point, but I should point out that a volunteer is by definition an amateur…

Anybody who thinks that neutering males will control population is MISGUIDED, it simply does not work that way.

If you read any of my posts, you would realise that I am vehemently opposed to irresponsible breeding. As such I fully support the mandatory sterilisation of mongrel BITCHES.

In any (higher order) animal population the growth of the population is controlled by the reproducing females. That is Biology 101.

Anecdotal comments about BYBs seeking entire male dogs are pointless. To be a BYB they require an entire bitch, to double their production they require a 2nd bitch, etc. Potentially a puppy farm could run a hundred bitches and still only require the occasional services of a single male dog.

Shelters sterilising male dogs in the interests of population control is pointless. It’s not completely impossible, but to achieve population control we would need to reach a point where the vast majority of male dogs were sterilised. It’s pointless because if shelters could ever reach such a level, the control would long since have been applied by their sterilisation of bitches.

[minimax]

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.

And how exactly do you suggest councils and shelters pay for vasectomies? My understanding is that the procedure is far more expensive.

Shelter staff are not misguided nor amateurs, I have met the most incredible shelter staff from all over the country.

Have you ever worked or volunteered in a shelter? I gather not from your comments, perhaps you should, either that or keep your stupid misguided comments to yourself!

As I SAID, I have “not heard of vasectomies being widely done in dogs.”

I don’t know whether it is more expensive, I can’t see why it would be, unless the alternative castration process is being performed by unqualified staff? Maybe ask a vet.

Not really the point, but I should point out that a volunteer is by definition an amateur…

Anybody who thinks that neutering males will control population is MISGUIDED, it simply does not work that way.

If you read any of my posts, you would realise that I am vehemently opposed to irresponsible breeding. As such I fully support the mandatory sterilisation of mongrel BITCHES.

In any (higher order) animal population the growth of the population is controlled by the reproducing females. That is Biology 101.

Anecdotal comments about BYBs seeking entire male dogs are pointless. To be a BYB they require an entire bitch, to double their production they require a 2nd bitch, etc. Potentially a puppy farm could run a hundred bitches and still only require the occasional services of a single male dog.

Shelters sterilising male dogs in the interests of population control is pointless. It’s not completely impossible, but to achieve population control we would need to reach a point where the vast majority of male dogs were sterilised. It’s pointless because if shelters could ever reach such a level, the control would long since have been applied by their sterilisation of bitches.

No, "by definition" a volunteer is someone who offers to do something for nothing in return...

[SkySoaringMagpie]

You could just as easily say that for population control we should desex all dogs and leave the bitches alone. After all the procedure is more invasive and expensive for bitches. Life isn't that simple in a world where we want people to retain freedom of choice and regulators are routinely underfunded.

My view is that if the dog or bitch does not have a responsible breeding future, and is to be rehomed or rescued, it should be desexed. Not just because of unwanted breeding, which is a significant burden on the community, but because it takes skill and patience to manage entire dogs and bitches. A dog is more likely to stick in a home if it isn't pissing all over everything or whining for 1 week straight during its season etc etc. And yes, people will say "oh but you can train". Yes you can, I manage a house with 2 entire bitches and 4 entire dogs and we haven't had unwanted litters or but sometimes it has been very hard work. And many people have neither the inclination nor the desire to work through it.

You know, I would never desex my dogs unless there was a health reason like pyo to demand it. I fully understand all the reasons why desexing is not ideal. I just think the risks in homes where there is no responsible breeding future for the dog outweigh the other considerations.

[tdierikx]

I've watched the castration procedure, and can honestly say that a vasectomy would definitely take longer - and thusly realise a higher fee for the procedure.

As for rescue desexing ALL dogs they rehome - well - it does ensure that no dog adopted from them will be used for any breeding at all.

If you want to argue the health pros and cons of desexing, then it's going to get even more confusing, because desexing can also have various health benefits - ie: can't get pyometra if the dog doesn't have a uterus - can't get testicular cancer if there are no testicles...

T.

[Her Majesty Dogmad]

Big D - I'm a volunteer but I'm definitely not an amateur, not that it's relevant.

It certainly isn't POINTLESS to desex all dogs, it's all about being responsible and doing your utmost to ensure that the pet is able to be part of a home (as opposed to a breeding facility) and doesn't have unwanted behaviours.

It would be a cold day in hell if I ever change my mind. It's been almost 20 years involvement in the rescue world, I've seen plenty.

[Nic.B]

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.

And how exactly do you suggest councils and shelters pay for vasectomies? My understanding is that the procedure is far more expensive.

Shelter staff are not misguided nor amateurs, I have met the most incredible shelter staff from all over the country.

Have you ever worked or volunteered in a shelter? I gather not from your comments, perhaps you should, either that or keep your stupid misguided comments to yourself!

As I SAID, I have “not heard of vasectomies being widely done in dogs.”

I don’t know whether it is more expensive, I can’t see why it would be, unless the alternative castration process is being performed by unqualified staff? Maybe ask a vet.

Not really the point, but I should point out that a volunteer is by definition an amateur…

Anybody who thinks that neutering males will control population is MISGUIDED, it simply does not work that way.

If you read any of my posts, you would realise that I am vehemently opposed to irresponsible breeding. As such I fully support the mandatory sterilisation of mongrel BITCHES.

In any (higher order) animal population the growth of the population is controlled by the reproducing females. That is Biology 101.

Anecdotal comments about BYBs seeking entire male dogs are pointless. To be a BYB they require an entire bitch, to double their production they require a 2nd bitch, etc. Potentially a puppy farm could run a hundred bitches and still only require the occasional services of a single male dog.

Shelters sterilising male dogs in the interests of population control is pointless. It’s not completely impossible, but to achieve population control we would need to reach a point where the vast majority of male dogs were sterilised. It’s pointless because if shelters could ever reach such a level, the control would long since have been applied by their sterilisation of bitches.

If you have no idea and don't know the costs associated with castration v's desex why would you sprout such rubbish and attack shelter staff?

A desex for a male takes ten fifteen min max, some vets working in remote areas desex males in five min. It is not an invasive procedure and the dogs recover very well.

You are a prat I can think of a number of highly trained trainers, behaviourists and rescuers who volunteer on a regular basis. Vets and vet nurses also volunteer, so do groomers and an endless number of people who contribute greatly to the welfare of shelter pets.

As to your comments on only desexing females and not males, pfffttt. Again, you are a prat.

[sas]

Don't feed the Troll.

[WreckitWhippet]

As for a vasectomy, it doesn't cost more. It will cost me the same at my vet for either procedure.

[Justrace]

I haven't read all the replies so I apologise if some one else has suggested this.

Could you offer a refund on proof of sterilisation OR offer to have the dogs de sexed for free at your vet clinic, you could add the cost of the op onto the adoption fee. Maybe even offer to pick up & drop the puppies off for the op. Most people are very motivated by money.

Good luck in which ever way you decide to go.

[Nic.B]

As for a vasectomy, it doesn't cost more. It will cost me the same at my vet for either procedure.

I would love further info on this if you have it available.

Keeping in mind shelters tender with a number of vets to assist in desexing at "rescue rates" with vets who generaly are going above and beyond to assist impounded shelter pets in their local area.

[WreckitWhippet]

As for a vasectomy, it doesn't cost more. It will cost me the same at my vet for either procedure.

I would love further info on this if you have it available.

Keeping in mind shelters tender with a number of vets to assist in desexing at "rescue rates" with vets who generaly are going above and beyond to assist impounded shelter pets in their local area.

I'm not sure what additional information I can give you. I appraoched my vet and said can and will you perform tubal ligation or vasectomy on pups and the answer was yes. My next question was at what cost and it worked out the same as desexing.

I can only suggest you approach the vet that handles your desexing and ask them.

[Nic.B]

As for a vasectomy, it doesn't cost more. It will cost me the same at my vet for either procedure.

I would love further info on this if you have it available.

Keeping in mind shelters tender with a number of vets to assist in desexing at "rescue rates" with vets who generaly are going above and beyond to assist impounded shelter pets in their local area.

I'm not sure what additional information I can give you. I appraoched my vet and said can and will you perform tubal ligation or vasectomy on pups and the answer was yes. My next question was at what cost and it worked out the same as desexing.

I can only suggest you approach the vet that handles your desexing and ask them.

Yes, though as I posted earlier shelters and pounds have tenders for a number of vets, and for very good reason.

We are not dealing with one Vet, nor as a dog owner or breeder.

Is your vet desexing or performing tubal litigation at rescue rates or are you paying full price?