Jump to content
BC Boards
Mark Billadeau

Pet Homes vs. Working Homes

Recommended Posts

But the fact of the matter is that people who rescue need to expect that their dog will have something the prevents them from being "the perfect dog".

 

But you'd never suggest rescue dogs are inferior? :rolleyes:

 

And ditto all of Robin's last post, while I'm at it.

 

ETA: We all have a different reality. It is what it is. For every problem Christina described with her rescues, I could probably find breeder dogs with the same. Or worse. I have friends who did BC rescue here for many years. And yet, because I guess they buy into the mindset, most of their personal dogs are bought from breeders. The last two? One put to sleep at 3 years old due to uncontrollable epilepsy and the latest, PTS at 8 months for the same freakin' thing. :D And yes, totally different breeders, too. The husband wants a fast flyball dog, and they didn't want to "take chances" with a rescue.

 

Meh. My rescue, from a totally unknown background, is THE fastest dog on our team, and the ONLY sub 4 dog.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Probably because the default understanding is that rescues aren't perfect. Does Jane Q. Public believe that "breeding dogs" aren't perfect but rescues are?

Reality. Empirical reality? From my personal experience and observation of my own and close friends' dogs - rescues, pups bought from breeders (can't quite call them breeder dogs) and foster dogs - the rescue dogs have fewer health problems and emotional issues than the dogs bought from breeders. But I'd hardly make a blanket statement about rescues vs. dogs bought from breeders from that data, much less call it Reality.

 

Then what would you call reality? If you aren't collecting a perception of "reality" from personal experience, where are you collecting it from?

 

What would you say it means?

 

I understand the frustration you have been expressing in this thread and I certainly think you should get the dog you want for whatever reason; however, it seems disingenuous to me to repeat over and over your experience of problem rescues while also saying that that doesn't imply that they are inferior. How could it not?

True--and the same is absolutely true of getting a puppy from a known breeding--though it's also true, you may have a bit more leeway in stacking the deck in your favor.

Do you have actual statistical evidence for your mindset? You haven't presented any evidence from dogs of known breedings and thus seem to be making an attribution error. My experience with rescue dogs and dogs of known breedings suggests to me that the problems, health and behavioral, are fairly evenly distributed--not that I would claim that to be actual statistical evidence. I also suspect it's likely that there will be breed differences. You seem to have a lot more experience with rescues of different breeds; my experience is really only from Border Collies.

 

Again, I don't think you need to justify in any way your decisions about the dogs you bring into your care and it's great that you've done so much to help dogs in need of rescue. But, I really don't understand how you can claim that the discussion of rescue dogs that you've presented here doesn't imply that they are inferior.

 

I think there is a disagreement in the definition of inferior. My definition of inferior, as defined on thefreedictionary.com, is: "a. Low or lower in quality, value, or estimation: inferior craft;

b. Second-rate; poor:".

 

I am not of the opinion that rescues are any better or any worse than dogs from a breeder. I am of the opinion that rescues are better for some and not better for others. They are circumstantial. A dog with a medical or behavioral problem is not any better or any worse than a dog without a medical or behavioral problem- simply because that problem may hinder my ownership of the dog, but help somebody else.

 

For example, a dog who is extremely protective of his family might do badly in a home where there are a lot of people coming and going, but would be a nice companion for somebody who lives alone and doesn't want a lot of visitors. Therefore, the overly protective dog is not inferior, but simply in the wrong home. A dog with a missing limb might not be the right fit for a serious sport person, but would go perfectly with a person who identifies with the dog's handicap. The blanket statement of "rescues are inferior" is ruling out those who are completely healthy; those with no physical or behavioral problems, and those who are a perfect match for their owners. It is also ruling out the dogs who haven't had a chance to be a good dog because they are in the wrong home. No dog is perfect- ever.

 

My point was that you can get a dog from a rescue or a breeder and will still end up with a dog who is completely wrong for your situation, just as you can get a dog from a rescue or breeder and end up with one that works well for you. All of them will require training, work, and commitment. When the average pet owner lurks on the forums and reads about all the success stories, they will go out and adopt a dog, expecting it to be the best dog they've ever had. They don't realize that behind these success stories, there was hours of training, bonding, and evaluating.

 

And I, twelve years and EIGHT HUNDRED DOGS later, disagree with you absolutely. There is certainly no rule that rescue dogs come with behavioural and health issues as a norm. I have offered so very many examples of this in this thread, but you opt to disregard them. While this is your choice, I hope other people reading understand that "exceptional" rescues are not unusual.

 

4855051203_e577bca3bf.jpg

 

RDM and 5 rescues:

Tweed - FDC, ATCh, MSDC, 5 times Nationals Qualifier and 5th place podium 2010 BCYRC

Piper - FDCH-G, MADC, 20th place BCYRC

Mr. Woo - look for him on your nearest TV!

Dexter - training for World Team

and TWooie, mole hunter extraordinaire.

 

I don't recall reading any of your examples since I've been replying to so many different people, so forgive me for "disregarding" everything you have put forward. I will go back and check for details when I finish this post. "Exceptional" rescues may not be unusual, but even "exceptional" rescues can have major problems. As I've said twice, the best dog I've ever had is a dog who I can't take out in public. For me, he is exceptional. For others, he is a nightmare.

 

Thank you for the work you do. Eight hundred dogs is quite a feat, and I'm sure you know exactly what you're talking about based on the experiences that you have had. But if I am not to get my opinion of how rescue works from my own experiences, where should I be getting it from? In my own experience, I have had plenty of behavior and physical problems with the dogs I have rescued. They all went to great homes with people who adore them. Obviously, to those people, they are not inferior. Beyond that, I'm not sure what you're disagreeing with.

 

But you'd never suggest rescue dogs are inferior? :rolleyes:

 

And ditto all of Robin's last post, while I'm at it.

 

ETA: We all have a different reality. It is what it is. For every problem Christina described with her rescues, I could probably find breeder dogs with the same. Or worse. I have friends who did BC rescue here for many years. And yet, because I guess they buy into the mindset, most of their personal dogs are bought from breeders. The last two? One put to sleep at 3 years old due to uncontrollable epilepsy and the latest, PTS at 8 months for the same freakin' thing. :D And yes, totally different breeders, too. The husband wants a fast flyball dog, and they didn't want to "take chances" with a rescue.

 

Meh. My rescue, from a totally unknown background, is THE fastest dog on our team, and the ONLY sub 4 dog.

 

Again, do we have the same definition of "inferior"? ALL dogs have something that prevents them from being "the perfect dog". In context, that quote meant that an owner cannot read posts about exceptional rescue dogs, then go out and adopt a dog the next day and expect it to be Lassie immediately.

 

I can give you plenty of examples of rescue dogs who were adopted for sports and didn't fare with for their owners. There are dogs on both sides of the spectrum who did and did not work out. My male BC one of the slower dogs in agility class, though he is improving every day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"The perfect dog" has been used repeatedly in this thread, and I just want to say that there really is no such thing. Before anyone chimes in with "I meant the perfect dog for me"... again ...no such thing. The reality is that one day your dog (whether a rescue or a dog from a breeder) will do something that you will find less than perfect. Perhaps you can look for a reason why, but sometimes it's just because it's not a robot, it's a living being.

 

Another point I'd like to make is (if it's already been made in these 11 pages...sorry) sometimes the problem is the human. I'm going to use myself as an example even if it will out me as less than perfect. :D Though I have tried and tried to train them out of this, Cadi and Jedi will rush the sliders when I'm going to let them out. Cadi will yank me arm out of a socket when she sees a squirrel. Perhaps I may be tempted to say to myself..."if I had gotten them from a good breeder instead of rescue with an unknown background, they wouldn't be so hyper". Except for this. When my DH approaches the sliders, they both back up and sit. :rolleyes: When my DH takes Cadi walking without a leash, she stays at his side and can be called off squirrels with a "leave it". :D So as much as I would not like to admit it, it's me. My DH would say...uh..can you repeat that? :D

 

ETA: I see that you clarified "perfect" Christina. I didn't see your last post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am not of the opinion that rescues are any better or any worse than dogs from a breeder.

 

Then why do you keep saying you want to buy a puppy so you don't end up with a dog with problems?

 

My point was that you can get a dog from a rescue or a breeder and will still end up with a dog who is completely wrong for your situation, just as you can get a dog from a rescue or breeder and end up with one that works well for you.

 

Then why do you need to buy a puppy to get an issue-free dog?

 

Thank you for the work you do. Eight hundred dogs is quite a feat, and I'm sure you know exactly what you're talking about based on the experiences that you have had. But if I am not to get my opinion of how rescue works from my own experiences, where should I be getting it from? In my own experience, I have had plenty of behavior and physical problems with the dogs I have rescued. They all went to great homes with people who adore them. Obviously, to those people, they are not inferior. Beyond that, I'm not sure what you're disagreeing with.

 

No need to thank me, I don't rescue dogs for kudos from my peers. I rescue them because I believe that the vast majority of them are wonderful dogs in bad circumstances, and need new situations, which I can help to provide. If I did not believe that, I wouldn't keep rescuing dogs.

 

I admit, this circular argument is beginning to frustrate me, mostly because I fail to see how you cannot grasp what you've been told by a number of people. Again: I disagree that the majority of rescue dogs come with health and/or behavioural issues and that in order to avoid the potential for either/both of these things, one must purchase a puppy. Many, if not most, rescue dogs are perfectly healthy in body and mind. The fact that you ended up with some that were not is not indicative of RESCUE dogs, it is indicative of the rescue dogs YOU happened to decide to acquire. They have issues, but they do not have those issues because they are rescues - they are dogs with issues who also happen to BE rescues.

 

I can give you plenty of examples of rescue dogs who were adopted for sports and didn't fare with for their owners.

 

And I can give you plenty of examples of purchased dogs who were bought for sports and didn't fare well with their owners. I fail to see the point of these petty exchanges?

 

I deal with rescue dogs every day of my life and have for more than a decade. The number of dogs with health and/or behavioural issues is considerably smaller than the ones without. I don't believe in the "perfect dog" scenario so I don't address that. But I DO believe that people who insist that the only way to get a dog that is physically and mentally sound is to buy a puppy, because rescue dogs all come with "behavioural and physical problems" (<-- which is a quote from you), are incorrect. Which is the thing I have been saying over and over.

 

At the risk of repeating myself, ha ha - buy a puppy if you want to buy a puppy. DON'T buy a puppy and tell yourself it's because it's the only way to acquire an issue-free dog, as that is a fallacy. Moreover, don't assert that belief, because you are perpetuating a myth that has no real basis in fact. And the reason I refute it every time you say it, is because I don't want other people believe to believe your fallacies.

 

RDM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I haven't decided where my next dog will come from. I would love to have a puppy. I would also love to, just once, have a dog without a metal pin holding her hip together (my female Border Collie, Maizee- hit by a car in her previous home), or the myriad mystery illnesses I have dealt with (the family Xoloitzcuintli, also a rescue, came from a hoarder, went through the first six months living here screaming in pain- we have absolutely no idea what was wrong with him, and all the vets and specialists in the world couldn't tell us).

 

Since I have every intention of fostering rescue dogs for the rest of my life, should it really be that impossible to find a working breeder who will sell me just a single puppy so I can have just one blank slate? There is something to be said for pet people (and sport people) who value a good working dog, but don't have the means to train one.

 

My original post. ^

 

Then why do you keep saying you want to buy a puppy so you don't end up with a dog with problems?

Then why do you need to buy a puppy to get an issue-free dog?

 

I said I wanted to buy a puppy to get a blank slate. I was focusing on behavioral problems over physical problems, as I acknowledged in another post that even hip scans guarantee nothing for the puppy. Yes, there is still a risk that a puppy will develop behavioral problems, but my intention was to raise just one dog that I know has been well-socialized from the beginning. I absolutely never said buying a puppy guarantees I will get a dog without problems or issues.

 

No need to thank me, I don't rescue dogs for kudos from my peers. I rescue them because I believe that the vast majority of them are wonderful dogs in bad circumstances, and need new situations, which I can help to provide. If I did not believe that, I wouldn't keep rescuing dogs.

 

So I guess I'll apologize for thanking you?

 

I admit, this circular argument is beginning to frustrate me, mostly because I fail to see how you cannot grasp what you've been told by a number of people. Again: I disagree that the majority of rescue dogs come with health and/or behavioural issues and that in order to avoid the potential for either/both of these things, one must purchase a puppy. Many, if not most, rescue dogs are perfectly healthy in body and mind. The fact that you ended up with some that were not is not indicative of RESCUE dogs, it is indicative of the rescue dogs YOU happened to decide to acquire. They have issues, but they do not have those issues because they are rescues - they are dogs with issues who also happen to BE rescues.

And I can give you plenty of examples of purchased dogs who were bought for sports and didn't fare well with their owners. I fail to see the point of these petty exchanges?

 

We're going to have to agree to disagree on this one. I have seen what I have seen, and you have seen what you have seen. I'll change my mind in ten years when I've established my own rescue farm.

 

For what it's worth, I will bring up a bias in your information: Without a doubt, if you've been rescuing with a mind to stay above financial distress, you are evaluating every dog you take into your rescue program so you do not accept dogs with major behavioral or health issues that you know you won't be able to handle. I never evaluated any of the dogs I took in- when I went to see them, I took them home that day. When I adopted them from across the country, I committed to them before they had an evaluation on them (with the exception of Pilot). It cost me thousands of dollars more than it would have if I had done everything responsibly, but I was paying less attention to "can afford" and more attention to "in need". Perhaps your acceptance protocol has weeded out a majority of the unhealthy and bad tempered dogs.

 

I also want to point out that your dogs are coming from your area. I have brought in dogs from southern states- dogs from the south tend to have far more issues than dogs from the north (which I can prove by, again, citing the particular situations I have been talking about, and just by checking out the bcrescue.com boards where every single person's first question about a sourthern dog is "Okay, what does he have?".

 

I deal with rescue dogs every day of my life and have for more than a decade. The number of dogs with health and/or behavioral issues is considerably smaller than the ones without. I don't believe in the "perfect dog" scenario so I don't address that. But I DO believe that people who insist that the only way to get a dog that is physically and mentally sound is to buy a puppy, because rescue dogs all come with "behavioural and physical problems" (<-- which is a quote from you), are incorrect. Which is the thing I have been saying over and over.

 

You quoted me, but out of context because I never once said that all rescue dogs come with behavioral and physical problems. I never said I believed in a perfect dog scenario. Both things that I have been saying over and over.

 

At the risk of repeating myself, ha ha - buy a puppy if you want to buy a puppy. DON'T buy a puppy and tell yourself it's because it's the only way to acquire an issue-free dog, as that is a fallacy. Moreover, don't assert that belief, because you are perpetuating a myth that has no real basis in fact. And the reason I refute it every time you say it, is because I don't want other people believe to believe your fallacies.

 

I also never said it was the *only* way to acquire an issue-free dog. I did say that it is ONE way to acquire a POTENTIALLY issue free dog.

 

You might be getting frustrated because you are deciding that I mean one thing when I actually mean something entirely different. Consider for a moment that you and I are actually living in different countries. I grew up in rural Florida (where the throwaway mentality on dogs is like no other) and moved to Connecticut ten years ago. I would never have this argument with somebody who was living in Florida because I know the mindset is completely different there than it is in Connecticut. For all you know, we could be comparing apples and oranges.

 

So please, stop quoting me out of context and actually *listen* to what I am saying without immediately bringing up something that contradicts opinions that I don't have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Another point I'd like to make is (if it's already been made in these 11 pages...sorry) sometimes the problem is the human. I'm going to use myself as an example even if it will out me as less than perfect. :D Though I have tried and tried to train them out of this, Cadi and Jedi will rush the sliders when I'm going to let them out. Cadi will yank me arm out of a socket when she sees a squirrel. Perhaps I may be tempted to say to myself..."if I had gotten them from a good breeder instead of rescue with an unknown background, they wouldn't be so hyper". Except for this. When my DH approaches the sliders, they both back up and sit. :rolleyes: When my DH takes Cadi walking without a leash, she stays at his side and can be called off squirrels with a "leave it". :D So as much as I would not like to admit it, it's me. My DH would say...uh..can you repeat that? :D

 

Haha! I have had this problem with my male Border Collie, who won't listen to anybody else in the family. I have a fantastic "wait" for him at the door (he is also a door bolter), but if anybody else in the family asks him to wait, he is out the door before they can even get it all the way open (which usually results in the entire thing coming off the track).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Then what would you call reality? If you aren't collecting a perception of "reality" from personal experience, where are you collecting it from?

Well, my personal experience is that the world is flat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, my personal experience is that the world is flat.

 

Hey, you know? I never trusted that Columbus guy either!

 

Joke. Just a joke. This old hippie is gettin' out of this warm kitchen! :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL @ Grenzehund. I am a scientist by training. I don't begin to believe that my experiences are all there is to reality. If that were the case, then many people would have very small worlds indeed.

 

J.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For what it's worth, I will bring up a bias in your information: Without a doubt, if you've been rescuing with a mind to stay above financial distress, you are evaluating every dog you take into your rescue program so you do not accept dogs with major behavioral or health issues that you know you won't be able to handle. I never evaluated any of the dogs I took in- when I went to see them, I took them home that day. When I adopted them from across the country, I committed to them before they had an evaluation on them (with the exception of Pilot). It cost me thousands of dollars more than it would have if I had done everything responsibly, but I was paying less attention to "can afford" and more attention to "in need". Perhaps your acceptance protocol has weeded out a majority of the unhealthy and bad tempered dogs.

 

You know what they say about assumptions, don't you?

 

RDM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well here in Canada, we believe that people who make unfounded assumptions make themselves sound like asses. Maybe it's different in America. I think it's probably just not smart to publicly announce that you know what my rescue philosophies are or what we do or do not take in, what issues we do and do not deal with, and what money we do and do not spend, especially when, you know, you don't have a clue.

 

I'm not really interested in arguing with you, because it's my experience that the newbies who beat their chests the loudest know the least, but ain't nobody gonna tell them nuthin' different. In cases like this, I'd rather have a debate with a caterpillar, or a box of salt. You're going to believe what you believe. However, every time you intimate that rescue dogs all come with physical and/or behavioural issues, I'm going to refute it, cuz you're wrong, and I don't want anyone else to believe you :rolleyes:

 

4701407792_757fb88bb2.jpg

 

RDM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well here in Canada, we believe that people who make unfounded assumptions make themselves sound like asses. Maybe it's different in America. I think it's probably just not smart to publicly announce that you know what my rescue philosophies are or what we do or do not take in, what issues we do and do not deal with, and what money we do and do not spend, especially when, you know, you don't have a clue.

 

I'm not really interested in arguing with you, because it's my experience that the newbies who beat their chests the loudest know the least, but ain't nobody gonna tell them nuthin' different. In cases like this, I'd rather have a debate with a caterpillar, or a box of salt. You're going to believe what you believe. However, every time you intimate that rescue dogs all come with physical and/or behavioural issues, I'm going to refute it, cuz you're wrong, and I don't want anyone else to believe you :rolleyes:

 

4701407792_757fb88bb2.jpg

 

RDM

 

"Unfounded" literally means no basis in fact. So what you're saying is that, if you do have the space, you will take any and every dog that comes across your path no matter the circumstance? I never said I know what your rescue philosophies are. I said I know the philosophies of other rescues and that it is the norm for a rescue who wishes to stay out of debt to conduct a temperament test before accepting a dog into their program.

 

Or I just read your website: "TDBCR regrets that for liability reasons, we cannot list your dog for you on our website. We only place dogs that have been evaluated by one of our volunteers for a minimum period of time, so we are not able to list your private rehome on our listings, or crosspost dogs in other rescues or shelters."

 

I know the context of this quote implies that you evaluate dogs in the program before adopting them out, but out of concern for liability, you probably wouldn't be accepting vicious dogs into the program as it is. Is that too much of an assumption?

 

And here I was worried that you would jump all over me for taking in dogs without an evaluation!

 

As a "newbie" (New to the forum? New to rescue? Isn't that an assumption?), I was under the impression that, up until two posts ago, we were having a mild mannered debate. My apologies if I seem to have struck a nerve. That was not my intention, and I certainly didn't come here to "beat my chest". For the absolute last time (because I'm so unreasonably tired of repeating it) I have never said that all rescues have emotional or behavioral problems.

 

What you have failed to acknowledge is that we both have the same cause. I rescue dogs, you rescue dogs. You're not only preaching to the choir, you're setting their robes on fire!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have had some wonderful dogs from puppies, I have had a nice natured puppy from a sports breeder who is not really a good agility dog. I have had a total temperament nightmare from a puppy, boy did she have some issues I had to work through. I have had a couple of dysplastic puppies. Puppies can definitely be crapshot even if you have done your homework, which I have done.

 

My first rescue was unevaluated but at around 6 months I took a chance on him. He has no problems at all, what an amazing agility dog he has the potential to be, just his original owners didnt know how to deal with and train a pair of working bred of Koolie litter brothers in suburbia. The rescue group that picked him up were dedicated to rescuing working dogs. Sound in everyway he is. My next kelpie I took in at 8 months old, timid but hey we are gelling nicely.

 

I was firmly in the want a puppy camp but have shifted somewhat. I would love another young ACD one day and can see myself carefully going around rescues and seeing if I can find one that suits me.

 

I could go either way really but I think these days I would take my time and definitely look to see what is available in the young rescues and what breeders of stock dogs may have available.

 

I think my mind would be open to all possibilities.

 

Getting a rescue is no guarantuee and getting a pup is no guarantee either. My experiences so far have been positive for rescues and both positive and negative for pups.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One day after a long hard job shoveling gravel

 

I sat down and had an aurgument with a box of salt

 

 

 

And you know

 

That dam salt box won

 

It was a pretty determined box of salt

 

 

Now I limit my arguments to my Husband

 

And the box of Baking soda

 

By heaven I can out talk that box

 

 

(I am sorry but that really got my imagination going- its 4:00 am on Sunday- now I'm off to milk)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tea, that is a great poem. Just perfect. Made my day.

 

:rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can not comment on many of the issues brought up. Too much.

However, I have bred, bought and rescued. And much to my surprise (not really - just dripping with sarcasm here!!!!) they were all individuals.

Can you possibly slant the odds of finding a dog suited for a specific purpose just a tiny bit by knowing the background and breeding - sure. But with doing proper homework/legwork you can certainly do the same with rescue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Me too, Tea. Cool poem. Got me goin' too.

After I watched Riggs make like a stock dog in high style, I celebrated by throwing this together...

post-10533-1285542818_thumb.jpg

Now don't anybody get all bent out of shape... It's not aimed at anyone in particular. Just the general absurdity found here and there. (Curiouser & curiouser.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Or I just read your website: "TDBCR regrets that for liability reasons, we cannot list your dog for you on our website. We only place dogs that have been evaluated by one of our volunteers for a minimum period of time, so we are not able to list your private rehome on our listings, or crosspost dogs in other rescues or shelters."

 

I know the context of this quote implies that you evaluate dogs in the program before adopting them out, but out of concern for liability, you probably wouldn't be accepting vicious dogs into the program as it is. Is that too much of an assumption?

 

Oh I think you are making a HUGE assumption, and this American knows the phrase Sheena referred to very well. I don't mean to rain on your parade here, but did it ever occur to you that dogs are taken in, evaluated, and then put up on the website...just like it says? That's what we do here in Arizona, and from what I know of Sheena and her rescue she does the same. I just had to put one of my fosters down because he was not safe to adopt out. You can bet your ass (pardon me folks) that he was in our rescue for a month while we tried everything in the world to help him. He has probably been violent with people his entire short life. He was dumped at the shelter by someone and left to meet his maker with complete strangers. Although we couldn't adopt him out we gave him a comfortable end surrounded by love, just as I know Sheena has had to do with dogs in the past as well. When you plucked that quote off of TDBCR's website and posted it here what were you trying to prove? Honestly, I am curious. Are you trying to imply that the number of dogs you have seen with issues makes you a better person since Sheena must be turning away all those poor messed up dogs to get numbers like that? Maybe I am taking you out of context like you are her, but I just don't see any other motive.

 

It is quite possible you are getting a higher number of issue dogs because the same bybs are producing the same messed up pups over and over again. That is not the reality for all rescues. ABCR will most likely hit our 1000th dog this year, and as I was told when the decision was made about Nimh, you could count on your hands the number of dogs we have had to put down as a rescue. If you truly believe that reality is based off of what you experience than Sheena's experience should be just as valuable as yours, and it wouldn't make sense to knock the data you trust. Then you could look at the other experiences posted on this discussion and see that there are other experiences different from yours as well. It should be clear at that point that everyone's reality is not the same as your "reality" and therefore your reality is obviously not universal.

 

If you don't evaluate a dog and adopt it out and it bites someone, people will sue. We evaluate dogs so that we know what we are adopting out. We don't evaluate them to see if they are worthy of our time. Every dog deserves a chance, but not every one will find a home. It is sad, but my reality.

 

ETA: What I know of TDBCR has been from posts on these boards and the 3 woofs blog. RDM/Sheena please correct me if I am wrong about anything I typed/said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Me too, Tea. Cool poem. Got me goin' too.

After I watched Riggs make like a stock dog in high style, I celebrated by throwing this together...

post-10533-1285542818_thumb.jpg

Now don't anybody get all bent out of shape... It's not aimed at anyone in particular. Just the general absurdity found here and there. (Curiouser & curiouser.)

 

Geonni, that's SUPER - I love it!!! Can I buy a copy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you don't evaluate a dog and adopt it out and it bites someone, people will sue. We evaluate dogs so that we know what we are adopting out. We don't evaluate them to see if they are worthy of our time. Every dog deserves a chance, but not every one will find a home. It is sad, but my reality.

 

ETA: What I know of TDBCR has been from posts on these boards and the 3 woofs blog. RDM/Sheena please correct me if I am wrong about anything I typed/said.

 

No, you did a simply wonderful job :rolleyes: That sums it up super well. Thank you!

 

I don't list other people's dogs because it's a liability risk, and also because I don't want to be associated with and/or even tangentially responsible for the screening and rehoming practices of other rescues, which may or may not jive with ours. I also don't have the time to chase down other rescues, shelters or owners to make sure the listings are current. There are lots of reasons why I don't list dogs other than the ones in my fostering program. None of them are at all related to the rather slanderous assumption that we only take in easy-to-place dogs, that's for certain. (Hai, West!) However, I don't see anything wrong with being careful about what you take in or what you adopt out. Seems downright idiotic to me to be taking in and adopting out dogs who are dangerous.

 

We take in fewer dogs these days too, not because there are so fewer needing rescue, or because we are being pickier, but rather because so many of my foster homes have adopted perfectly lovely, and wonderful issue-free fosters/dogs from me too and have retired from volunteering for the time being :D

 

RDM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Geonni, that's SUPER - I love it!!! Can I buy a copy?

 

Thanks...

Just download and print it. But THANKS for asking!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh I think you are making a HUGE assumption, and this American knows the phrase Sheena referred to very well. I don't mean to rain on your parade here, but did it ever occur to you that dogs are taken in, evaluated, and then put up on the website...just like it says?

 

I'm pretty sure I acknowledged that: "I know the context of this quote implies that you evaluate dogs in the program before adopting them out...."

 

That's what we do here in Arizona, and from what I know of Sheena and her rescue she does the same. I just had to put one of my fosters down because he was not safe to adopt out. You can bet your ass (pardon me folks) that he was in our rescue for a month while we tried everything in the world to help him. He has probably been violent with people his entire short life. He was dumped at the shelter by someone and left to meet his maker with complete strangers. Although we couldn't adopt him out we gave him a comfortable end surrounded by love, just as I know Sheena has had to do with dogs in the past as well. When you plucked that quote off of TDBCR's website and posted it here what were you trying to prove? Honestly, I am curious. Are you trying to imply that the number of dogs you have seen with issues makes you a better person since Sheena must be turning away all those poor messed up dogs to get numbers like that? Maybe I am taking you out of context like you are her, but I just don't see any other motive.

 

No. I am trying to point out that there is potentially a greater risk for getting a seriously screwed up dog when you A ) pull from the south B ) without any evaluation. I don't see how taking in dogs without an evaluation would make me a better person. If anything, it makes me an idiot since I would be rescuing at huge personal risk, to my family, my dogs, and myself.

 

It is quite possible you are getting a higher number of issue dogs because the same bybs are producing the same messed up pups over and over again.

 

All of my rescues were pulled from separate sides of the country from situations that are very unlikely to have any relation to each other. Two (three) from southern municipal pounds, two from northern municipal pounds, two from a breeder (technically), one from a hoarder, one from a pet home, and so on and so forth.

 

If you truly believe that reality is based off of what you experience than Sheena's experience should be just as valuable as yours, and it wouldn't make sense to knock the data you trust. Then you could look at the other experiences posted on this discussion and see that there are other experiences different from yours as well. It should be clear at that point that everyone's reality is not the same as your "reality" and therefore your reality is obviously not universal.

 

I believe that my reality is what I experience. I'm also not knocking any data, but rather defending the data being knocked. I find it interesting that I am criticized for arguing a point based on my experiences, while you are permitted to make a point based on your experiences which renders my point obsolete. Doesn't that seem slightly out of balance?

 

If not my experience, what is my reality supposed to be based on? What I hear from other people? Plenty of people will tell me that breeding my pet dogs is just fine, feeding Beneful is healthy, and neutering a dog causes it to become obese. Does that make it true? In my experience, breeding pet dogs is the reason we have so many overcrowded shelters in the first place, Beneful is crap, and neutering a dog has no effect on his weight (sans the absence of testicles).

 

If you don't evaluate a dog and adopt it out and it bites someone, people will sue. We evaluate dogs so that we know what we are adopting out. We don't evaluate them to see if they are worthy of our time. Every dog deserves a chance, but not every one will find a home. It is sad, but my reality.

 

I worked for a particularly irresponsible rescue for three months. I'm all too aware of what people will do when you adopt an aggressive dog into their home.

 

Where I live, part of the accepted process of admitting a dog into any rescue program is evaluating that dog to be sure the dog is actually reasonably friendly or healthy. This is also done frequently on the bcrescue.org forums, where potential rescues or adopters will inquire about a dog's status and ask that a volunteer go visit the dog and perform a basic temperament test. Due to the fact that this is done so widely across the bcrescue.org forums, I assumed it was a typical rescue practice. Forgive me if I was mistaken.

 

 

None of them are at all related to the rather slanderous assumption that we only take in easy-to-place dogs, that's for certain. (Hai, West!) However, I don't see anything wrong with being careful about what you take in or what you adopt out. Seems downright idiotic to me to be taking in and adopting out dogs who are dangerous.

 

Which was exactly my point. A rescue should evaluate any potential dog before taking it in. I was trying to say that the dogs I ended up with had issues because I didn't do any evaluations (although, ironically, the only one that was evaluated had to be euthanized for aggression).

 

--

 

So, I figure I'm not being clear enough here and I've half forgotten what even started this entire discussion because it has gone so far from the original topic.

 

It is my own personal opinion that a significant number of rescue dogs come with physical and behavioral problems. That is not to say that these physical or behavioral problems render the dog unadoptable, but rather the dogs with these issues need a little extra work. (And I hear the cries "But a puppy is extra work too!"). By purchasing a puppy from a breeder, it would seem to me that one would have a slight advantage over their dog's behavioral and physical issues- if a major issue develops, they can evaluate that they only have themselves to blame for said issue, unless of course the problem has originated from the breeder's dogs or home (chemical imbalance, being dropped, etc).

 

However, by adopting a dog, it is far more likely that any potential problems will be known before one brings said dog into their home. If the dog is perfect, fantastic! However, I would hate for Jane and John Smith to walk into an adoption center and expect to pick out the perfect dog because they read all these wonderful reports online of rescue dogs who went on to do amazing things like pulling their family out of a burning building or winning x competition. It happens, but these things require training (competition) and cannot be predicted (fire). Of course, a puppy from a breeder won't be guaranteed to do any of these things either. The emphasis was just being placed on all the spectacular rescue dogs who have done fantastic things with their lives.

 

Now it would be super if forum members would stop jumping down my throat for stating things they don't agree with. Kapeesh?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dunno if it makes me a "bad" rescue or not, but I only accepted dogs that were in pretty good shape, mentally and physically. My means were extremely limited, and I had to try to avoid biting off more than I could chew.

 

I occasionally bailed a Collie out (I'm speaking of Lassie Collies here) and took them straight to the vet clinic where I worked for E&D. It seemed a better and more humane solution than allowing an old dog with multiple physical problems to languish in the pound until either killed or taken out by someone who would end up bouncing it back to the pound when they found out what it would cost to fix/ maintain it.

 

If that made me a bad rescue, then so be it. Everybody has their limitations, and seeing an old, infirm or neurotic dog bounce from home to home, getting more and more screwed up with each abandonment was more than I was up to.

 

Adopters that are up to the task of sorting out a dog with multiple issues are few and far between. For my part, I think the resources are better used rehoming two or three high-function dogs that one that has a good chance of turning out to be unplaceable.

 

Just my opinion. YMMV.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...