Outside Looking In

[_PL_]

Some people are just bitches, I am not ever running in the literal sense either and a build of body is not a criteria for whether you have the ability to help, or own a dog.

I guess my point being, we all get judged in rescue or outside rescue, sometimes there are bitchy personal judgements made by people, they are best avoided, unless you applied for a dog that did not approve of your choice of paint colours in renovating, your dog demanded to know when your husband is getting home, or the dog may be concerned about your working status as a working mum and is against that.

But not knowing the dog, separation anxiety and cat chasing may be a legitimate concern, all the others, just like I copped are just from nutters within rescue.

Actually, I just had a flashback to a dog rescued from Hawkesbury. She was rescued and then going straight to a new home, she was safe so I was never given her photos to post. All good. Happy ending.

But her NUTCASE fellow rescuer told the adopter that I had deemed the dog not worth saving. A dear little old senior foxy.

The owner made a fuss, created a FB page for her all about big bad rescuer deeming his dog not worthy and better off dead.

The point to that was;

As was stated in another thread, it attracts people who can be worryingly unstable or just downright crazy. Substance and alcohol abuse can be involved as well. I think sometimes that's what those on the outside-looking-in are seeing.

Edited May 14, 2015 by Powerlegs

[sas]

I don't understand why a rescue will not adopt a dog to a home that has an undesexed dog if the dog they are rehoming is desexed? How bizarre? How does it impact anything?

These days there is overwhelming evidence to state why dogs shouldn't be desexed young or at all, it's completely up to a family if they wish to not desex their dog. There are so many great families who keep entire dogs that are responsible. Maybe because I have a foot in the show dog world and also in the rescue world I have a different overview of the situation than many rescue only people?

Yes, all rescue dogs have to be desexed but how is it any of your business if their other dog is entire or not? It's about as relevant as if the human male has been cut or not.

[tdierikx]

It's about as relevant as if the human male has been cut or not.

There have been times I've actually wanted to suggest that to some prospective adopters... errr!

T.

[RuralPug]

I have refused to adopt out to homes that have an undesexed pet if they can not give me a good reason WHY that pet is entire. If they are waiting for a large breed puppy to gain maturity before being desexed, then fine. Or if they are willing to desex that pet immediately so they can adopt the one that they are applying for, that is fine too. Or if their current pet is entire because they are exhibiting, or bound by breeder's terms or something, that would be fine too.

My reasoning is that if they have just not bothered to desex OR won't spend the money, and that is the only reason the current animals remain entire then I am not satisfied with the priority they give to their pets' welfare and I am certainly not going to release a dog that I have invested a lot of time and money in to someone who doesn''t care enough.

[Her Majesty Dogmad]

I don't understand why a rescue will not adopt a dog to a home that has an undesexed dog if the dog they are rehoming is desexed? How bizarre? How does it impact anything?

These days there is overwhelming evidence to state why dogs shouldn't be desexed young or at all, it's completely up to a family if they wish to not desex their dog. There are so many great families who keep entire dogs that are responsible. Maybe because I have a foot in the show dog world and also in the rescue world I have a different overview of the situation than many rescue only people?

Yes, all rescue dogs have to be desexed but how is it any of your business if their other dog is entire or not? It's about as relevant as if the human male has been cut or not.

I rehome Italian Greyhounds, Whippets, Chinese Cresteds and other dogs, often from my own home. I've had larger dogs here and smaller dogs and have been personally rescuing for over 10 years. I've lost count of the amount of dogs I've rescued and/or fostered but it's been a huge amount.

With the Italians, it is important not to desex them too early - if we get a young puppy then we wait until they are 6 months, they don't go anywhere until they are desexed but as keen as we are and as easy as it is to rehome a puppy, we also don't want to compromise their bone plate growth = very important in this breed. So I get that it isn't good for some dogs to be desexed too young, that's fine and I leave that with the owners and their vets - I won't rehome whilst their dogs are undesexed but I understand why they are waiting.

I understand that show and breeding dogs need to be undesexed - that's fine too.

Based on my own experience, having undesexed dogs in my home has presented nothing but issues with my own dogs who are all desexed (and I've owned lots of different dogs as I mainly take on mature dogs for myself). Based on my experience of working in a shelter, working with other rescue groups and so on, my observance has also been that having undesexed and desexed animals together can pose issues.

So my decision is based upon experience. If you didn't have any issues with having undesexed dogs around SAS, that's good and lucky for you.

I've also rescued and known dogs that haven't been desexed and have had testicular, prostate, ovarian cancers and peritoneal hernias which is another reason why I don't leave dogs undesexed - ever.

It's completely irrelevant to mention humans getting the snip, I don't confuse the two.

Edited May 15, 2015 by Her Majesty Dogmad

[keetamouse]

I must say that I have rehomed a dog to a home where the other dog was not desexed, only noticed when I was leaving and the guy had the dog in his arms on his back and then noticed the "jewels" I was not about to rip up the paperwork give them back the adoption fee and grab the dog out of the woman's arms and then leave, the dog has a great home, their other dog is delightful and the 2 of them got along as though they had been together since birth, the reason he was not done was a "man" thing the hubbie didn't want him done.

What I did do was tell them both about what can happen to their boy later in life if they don't get him done and the benefits in having a desexed boy as opposed to an entire one. Some people have gone and got their dog done after I educate them, so it can be a good thing but to not rehome because they have an entire male is not an issue for me.

Yes I do rehome if they have an entire male.

Maree

CPR

[Salukifan]

I must say that I have rehomed a dog to a home where the other dog was not desexed, only noticed when I was leaving and the guy had the dog in his arms on his back and then noticed the "jewels" I was not about to rip up the paperwork give them back the adoption fee and grab the dog out of the woman's arms and then leave, the dog has a great home, their other dog is delightful and the 2 of them got along as though they had been together since birth, the reason he was not done was a "man" thing the hubbie didn't want him done.

What I did do was tell them both about what can happen to their boy later in life if they don't get him done and the benefits in having a desexed boy as opposed to an entire one. Some people have gone and got their dog done after I educate them, so it can be a good thing but to not rehome because they have an entire male is not an issue for me.

Yes I do rehome if they have an entire male.

Maree

CPR

I hope you also tell them about the increased risks of osteosarcoma, hemangiosarcoma, prostate cancer and geriatric cognitive impairment that desexing their male dogs will create.

It would be great if desexing dogs was all good news but quite frankly a procedure carried out largely for the convenience of human management of our dogs can have some negative effects, ESPECIALLY if carried out on young pups. I'm all for desexing but people should be informed of the whole story before its done.

That's an inconvenient truth not often shared by animal welfare groups.

As for entire male dogs being a risk to desexed bitches? Nope. If they get out of line or frisky, I'd suggest the risk flows the other way!!

[_PL_]

I hope you also tell them about the increased risks of osteosarcoma, hemangiosarcoma, prostate cancer and geriatric cognitive impairment that desexing their male dogs will create.

It would be great if desexing dogs was all good news but quite frankly a procedure carried out largely for the convenience of human management of our dogs can have some negative effects, ESPECIALLY if carried out on young pups. I'm all for desexing but people should be informed of the whole story before its done.

That's an inconvenient truth not often shared by animal welfare groups.

As for entire male dogs being a risk to desexed bitches? Nope. If they get out of line or frisky, I'd suggest the risk flows the other way!!

The wonderful thing about finding reports of this or that, is the way one side or the other has a way of making them prove a point. Like the anti child vaccine arguments.

I understand breeders feel passionate about it but it's offensive in the rescue section. We desex. We also care. And the little jibes about it being detrimental and convenient is way out of line.

Maybe there is a desexing risk, maybe not. But I'm not interested when frankly on the ground and out of the showring, I'm fed up with pyometra, mammary tumours ....... testicular cancers and enlarged prostate tearing open a massive hernia in the poor boys. I'm fed up that it could be prevented and the dogs we get have been suffering, sometimes terminal.

There is zero need for people to have an entire pet if they can't prevent matings, or tell what a uterine infection is and can't see a tumour hanging of their dog's balls.

[Salukifan]

I hope you also tell them about the increased risks of osteosarcoma, hemangiosarcoma, prostate cancer and geriatric cognitive impairment that desexing their male dogs will create.

It would be great if desexing dogs was all good news but quite frankly a procedure carried out largely for the convenience of human management of our dogs can have some negative effects, ESPECIALLY if carried out on young pups. I'm all for desexing but people should be informed of the whole story before its done.

That's an inconvenient truth not often shared by animal welfare groups.

As for entire male dogs being a risk to desexed bitches? Nope. If they get out of line or frisky, I'd suggest the risk flows the other way!!

The wonderful thing about finding reports of this or that, is the way one side or the other has a way of making them prove a point. Like the anti child vaccine arguments.

I understand breeders feel passionate about it but it's offensive in the rescue section. We desex. We also care. And the little jibes about it being detrimental and convenient is way out of line.

Maybe there is a desexing risk, maybe not. But I'm not interested when frankly on the ground and out of the showring, I'm fed up with pyometra, mammary tumours ....... testicular cancers and enlarged prostate tearing open a massive hernia in the poor boys. I'm fed up that it could be prevented and the dogs we get have been suffering, sometimes terminal.

There is zero need for people to have an entire pet if they can't prevent matings, or tell what a uterine infection is and can't see a tumour hanging of their dog's balls.

I agree completely.

I am sorry that sharing knowledge of research about the ramifications of desexing, in particular early age desexing in a rescue page offended people

It won't happen again.

Edited May 16, 2015 by Haredown Whippets

[_PL_]

If that's a way of saying you're sorry but not sorry if we're too stubborn to care about 'ramifications' then you may have completely missed my point. Information sharing yes, but put-downs about rescuers deliberately covering up whatever research you choose is unfair.

There's times I'd happily grab a breeder by the shoulders and drag them to the pound to see the crosses borne of pups they sold entire. Or point out that Trading Post now as the latest fad purebred crossed with all sorts of weird and wonderful pound fodder. But it's not something you say on Dol. Because it's considered breeder bashing, not information sharing.

[Dame Aussie]

I have worked in a shelter so totally understand the importance of desexing for most pet owners, however I agree that there are risks and benefits that go both ways and there should never be anything wrong with being fully informed.

[Malti]

I hope you also tell them about the increased risks of osteosarcoma, hemangiosarcoma, prostate cancer and geriatric cognitive impairment that desexing their male dogs will create.

It would be great if desexing dogs was all good news but quite frankly a procedure carried out largely for the convenience of human management of our dogs can have some negative effects, ESPECIALLY if carried out on young pups. I'm all for desexing but people should be informed of the whole story before its done.

That's an inconvenient truth not often shared by animal welfare groups.

As for entire male dogs being a risk to desexed bitches? Nope. If they get out of line or frisky, I'd suggest the risk flows the other way!!

I can't believe you are saying if a dog gets desexed you think rescuers should give the adopter a various list of possible health issues that may arise out of desexing.

That would be as presumptious as rescue telling a breeder they have to tell them all about pyometra and mammary tumours for female dogs that go undesexed for many years. Do breeders tell the people that buy their dog they are not allowed to desex their dogs due to the risks you are concerned about? There is a discussion on a breeder forum presently that breeders are wondering how they can make the buyers of their pups desex the dog, so go figure.

I don't think ethical registered breeders or rescuers need a lecture on if they decide to rehome a dog to people that desex or do not desex their dogs, it comes down to choice.

As much as breeders are owners of their dogs, rescuers are owners of their dogs they adopting out, BOTH get to choose without feeling the need to be patronised for having a desexing policy.

For every study done there will be one that counteracts it, and it will just go on and on, and actually proves nothing at all, except that people can decide what is the best things for their pets without others criticising their choice.

[Her Majesty Dogmad]

Ah yes, forgot about the pyometra. I've saved a number of females that had pyometra and mammary tumours.

Had the dogs with pyometra stayed in their original homes or in the pound at that very time or were still wandering, they'd all have died - they were saved at the 11th hour as I was desexing the dogs.

I'm not changing my opinion on this, I will remain an ethical rescuer and for me that includes desexing.

Many a fine point in the posts above from fellow rescuers so I won't continue this argument, I know which side of the fence I'm on in this case and it's for very good reasons.

RIP the dogs I couldn't save in spite of my best efforts because they were not desexed and I rescued them too late.

[_PL_]

RIP the dogs I couldn't save in spite of my best efforts because they were not desexed and I rescued them too late.

Too many, too late. Always remembered. xx

[SkySoaringMagpie]

Desexing is not one size fits all, as I think this thread shows.

All of the rescues that leave Saluki rescue leave desexed because my view is that once a dog hits the rescue system, you need to take all available steps to lower the risk of them winding up back in that system. Desexing is one of those things that clearly lowers their attractiveness to some high risk people.

I happily say that I have double standards in this area because NONE of my dogs are desexed and that choice is about health, performance and well being. In an ideal world, I would never desex a Saluki, but desexing them is recognition our world is not ideal. I have rescued more dogs of my breed than I have bred, and none of mine have been used to pump out shelter fodder but I have certainly (with help from others) rescued dogs that were being used that way and desexed them.

Yes there are risks on both sides of the fence for health and well being, and some risks are breed specific. For example, in my breed hemangio is a problem and late in life desexing is associated with increased risk. That said, if one of my girls got pyo, I'd whip her into the vet for a spay right away and pyo is something I actively watch for.

[mita]

I happily say that I have double standards in this area because NONE of my dogs are desexed and that choice is about health, performance and well being. In an ideal world, I would never desex a Saluki, but desexing them is recognition our world is not ideal. I have rescued more dogs of my breed than I have bred, and none of mine have been used to pump out shelter fodder but I have certainly (with help from others) rescued dogs that were being used that way and desexed them.

Not double standards at all. Yours is a summary of an intelligence response ... where it can be necessary to keep two ideas in your head at the same time so adjustment can be made for assessment of risk & benefits in different settings.

In fact, a lot of human medical treatments follow the same principle.

There was a UQ research review paper re desexing dogs which boiled down to basically what you've said ... & what Powerlegs has said, too. As both a breeder & rescuer within your breed, you assess & respond to each situation. Powerlegs, as a rescuer, responds to one situation & has no need to inform about another set of risks.

[Salukifan]

Malti:>

I can't believe you are saying if a dog gets desexed you think rescuers should give the adopter a various list of possible health issues that may arise out of desexing.

That's good because I wasn't.  My response was NOT given in response to rescue dogs but to THIS scenario:

I must say that I have rehomed a dog to a home where the other dog was not desexed, </b>only noticed when I was leaving and the guy had the dog in his arms on his back and then noticed the "jewels" I was not about to rip up the paperwork give them back the adoption fee and grab the dog out of the woman's arms and then leave, the dog has a great home, their other dog is delightful and the 2 of them got along as though they had been together since birth, the reason he was not done was a "man" thing the hubbie didn't want him done

What I did do was tell them both about what can happen to their boy later in life if they don't get him done and the benefits in having a desexed boy as opposed to an entire one. Some people have gone and got their dog done after I educate them, so it can be a good thing but to not rehome because they have an entire male is not an issue for me.

I would never deign to tell any rescue what they should and should not do with the dogs they rescue.;However, when it comes to rescuers (or indeed any person) "educating" owners of dogs already in homes, my completely misguided thoughts were that a balanced view of the procedure, rather than scaremongering, was the way to go. The timing of the procedure matters, particularly for giant breeds but also for some others. As i said, I won't be sharing knowledge in this forum again.

</div>

Edited May 17, 2015 by Haredown Whippets

[Malti]

Malti:>

I can't believe you are saying if a dog gets desexed you think rescuers should give the adopter a various list of possible health issues that may arise out of desexing.

That's good because I wasn't.  My response was NOT given in response to rescue dogs but to THIS scenario:

I must say that I have rehomed a dog to a home where the other dog was not desexed, </b>only noticed when I was leaving and the guy had the dog in his arms on his back and then noticed the "jewels" I was not about to rip up the paperwork give them back the adoption fee and grab the dog out of the woman's arms and then leave, the dog has a great home, their other dog is delightful and the 2 of them got along as though they had been together since birth, the reason he was not done was a "man" thing the hubbie didn't want him done

What I did do was tell them both about what can happen to their boy later in life if they don't get him done and the benefits in having a desexed boy as opposed to an entire one. Some people have gone and got their dog done after I educate them, so it can be a good thing but to not rehome because they have an entire male is not an issue for me.

I would never deign to tell any rescue what they should and should not do with the dogs they rescue.;However, when it comes to rescuers (or indeed any person) "educating" owners of dogs already in homes, my completely misguided thoughts were that a balanced view of the procedure, rather than scaremongering, was the way to go. The timing of the procedure matters, particularly for giant breeds but also for some others. As i said, I won't be sharing knowledge in this forum again.

</div>

Please read the post in its entirety, the desexing was not done on the dog because it was a 'man' thing, not due to any concerns over the health implication.

Nor did the rescuer force them to desex their dog, they chose with their own free will.

Scaremongering works both ways, there is more than just studies to health, it is also population control and behavioural issues. On the health issue, a quarter of undesexed females get pyometra, mammary tumours are common, it is not just about desexing male dogs.

Not sure why you will stop sharing any thoughts you have on here, can't people disagree?

Edited May 17, 2015 by Malti

[*kirty*]

I agree completely with SkySoaringMagpie. As a rescuer, nothing leaves here entire. I believe that all rescues should be desexed. However I own an entire dog, in fact I have two at present, and I do not believe in desexing MY dogs until they are physically mature (approx 2 years old). I believe that most behavioural problems in dogs that are blamed on being entire are actually due to lack of training. There are pros and cons for desexing and not desexing.

Anyway, to get back on track, I think blanket rules in rescue are not ideal. Not every dog is suitable for certain situations, but some might be. Potential adopters need to be assessed for what they are, educated if necessary, and hopefully assisted in finding their ideal dog. Ruling out a great home just because they have an entire dog is crazy.

[_PL_]

I agree completely with SkySoaringMagpie. As a rescuer, nothing leaves here entire. I believe that all rescues should be desexed. However I own an entire dog, in fact I have two at present, and I do not believe in desexing MY dogs until they are physically mature (approx 2 years old). I believe that most behavioural problems in dogs that are blamed on being entire are actually due to lack of training. There are pros and cons for desexing and not desexing.

Anyway, to get back on track, I think blanket rules in rescue are not ideal. Not every dog is suitable for certain situations, but some might be. Potential adopters need to be assessed for what they are, educated if necessary, and hopefully assisted in finding their ideal dog. Ruling out a great home just because they have an entire dog is crazy.

If it's the rescue's policy then it's their right to choose.