Urgent Death Row Dogs in NYC - Adopt to Northeast area

[Marshfield]

[QUOTE=Countrywood;8622326]
vxf111, I agree 100% , which to me at least means bans on dog breeding, period , unless one is licensed AND can prove a waiting list of customers (demand ) for a litter. Fines to anyone who violates, whether BB or professional. True, some people would evade but the numbers would go down dramatically. Close down the puppy mills and cheap byb on CL.

These are the same folks who are already ignoring current existing legislation regarding ownership numbers and licensing. Without massively more enforcement, why do you think suddenly adding more requirements is going to stop the careless breeder. Without getting in to defining puppy mills, most of them are already subject to (and in many cases compliant with) extensive USDA regulation. It just makes more paperwork for those of us already in compliance. I have more homes than puppies as do my fellow breeders that I know.

But few want to curtail the “freedom” to act irresponsibility and others for some inane reason claim license laws would hurt “good breeders” (how?).

It’s yet one more thing to do. We all work full time jobs to allow us our dog habit.

Mandatory spay or neuter by X date after get an animal or fines. At same time offer low cost spay and neuter, which already exists.[/QUOTE]

And this blatantly ignores modern knowledge of cancer risk and orthopedic injury.

[khall]

BYB who are ignoring the laws or are ignorant of the laws should be reported to the necessary authority, either AC or as in GAs case Ga Dept of Ag who oversees the licensing of dog breeders among other responsibilities. The Dept of Ag will shut those down (local AC will too) those who are puppy mills, hoarders, unlicensed breeders etc. I personally know of a licensed rescue who ignored their limitations for cats (i.e. were hoarders) and were shut down by the Dept of Ag. Their have been several hoarding cases and neglect/abuse cases (bad breeders) that were shut down last year local to me.

It is hard to enforce spay/neuter laws here, people just don’t care enough. Rural areas with many dogs that just roam.

[Countrywood]

Incantation,
I imagine a panel of vets, breederr, trainers as well as Animal Welfare people could determine a best consensus to the questins you ask above

[pezk]

[QUOTE=Countrywood;8622326]
vxf111, I agree 100% , which to me at least means bans on dog breeding, period , unless one is licensed AND can prove a waiting list of customers (demand ) for a litter. Fines to anyone who violates, whether BB or professional. True, some people would evade but the numbers would go down dramatically. Close down the puppy mills and cheap byb on CL.

But few want to curtail the “freedom” to act irresponsibility and others for some inane reason claim license laws would hurt “good breeders” (how?).

Mandatory spay or neuter by X date after get an animal or fines. At same time offer low cost spay and neuter, which already exists.[/QUOTE]

Oh nonsense! The only people that are going to be hurt are the responsible ones. No matter how many laws you pass, you are not going to stop the breeding by people who have fighting dogs, or don’t license their dogs, etc.

[dkcbr]

[QUOTE=Countrywood;8622661]
Back to what I suggested in my post, mandatory spay and neuter for all pets after X date of purchase or adoption, or a daily fine accrues, unless one is a licensed breeder (with such licenses hard to come by). Or some law or regulation with consequences, otherwise we’ll just see more of the same.[/QUOTE]

Welp… there goes the whole sport of AKC conformation showing, pretty much. Your idea of mandatory spay & neuter and daily fines is going to be a very tough sell.

I doubt the whole purebred fancy consisting of owners, handlers, breeders, judges, and the AKC organization (whose main mission is maintaining a registry of purebreds), plus show superintendents and the confo supplies industry are all going to willingly sacrifice the generations of sport and responsible breeding as part of the effort to reduce shelter populations for which they are largely not responsible in the first place.

I really don’t see the value proposition from their point of view. Yes there is overpopulation of pit mixes, 'doodles, etc. but no the whole conformation fancy doesn’t need or deserve to be jettisoned. By and large they are not puppy mills.

And, amazingly, there are many many many many very responsible people who do keep intact dogs and never contribute one single puppy to the shelter overpopulation problem.

You’d need to make a pretty strong case, I think…and make a clear distinction between backyard breeders and responsible ones.

[pezk]

It isn’t just conformation dogs but many performance dogs esp the males, in Schulzhund, aren’t neutered. There isn’t any reason to neuter the dogs.

[Countrywood]

One would think the small niche of performance show breeders would be recognized as a separate category by those whose main concern is the far greater numbers of pets and pet population. Of course there could be exemptions or a separate category for elite shows and sport breeding, it’s a niche that has little if anything to do with the main problem.

[Countrywood]

Oh nonsense! The only people that are going to be hurt are the responsible ones.

How, specifically are the “responsible ones” going to be hurt? This mantra is repeated but nobody says how or in what way they will be “hurt”.

No matter how many laws you pass, you are not going to stop the breeding by people who have fighting dogs, or don’t license their dogs, etc.

Fighting laws drove dog fighting underground and the arrests and fines deter it. It has shrank in numbers and there would be far more dog fighting if it were legal. As far as breeding, since the laws are patchwork, lax and in many areas non existent, all we know is that the lack of laws has landed us where we are now, an unending stream of over population of unwanted pets who end up in shelters and euthanized, year after year .

[dkcbr]

[QUOTE=Countrywood;8622923]
One would think the small niche of performance show breeders would be recognized as a separate category by those whose main concern is the far greater numbers of pets and pet population. Of course there could be exemptions or a separate category for elite shows and sport breeding, it’s a niche that has little if anything to do with the main problem.[/QUOTE]

No, I am actually talking not about performance show breeders but conformation show breeders (of course there’s a bit of overlap there). Not really a small niche, although I grant you we don’t know exactly what numbers we’re talking about.

But either way I am not getting how you would separate and define these show breeders, and elite shows and sport breeding (not absolutely sure what you mean by those as well) to distinguish them from backyard breeders or whatever. Moreover, it’s not clear who would make such a determination, and how they would do it. Are we talking federal, state, county, city, etc. How will the initiative be funded? Are all dog-owning homes to be inspected periodically? Not to be ridiculous, but would I be required to have an inspector come check my three bitches for spay scars to prove I’m in compliance and not be charged daily accruing fines?

It all just doesn’t sound realistic. Applying the same blanket “cure” to ALL dog owners who may or may not wish to keep their dogs intact, or who may or may not wish to breed, or who may or may not show in conformation, or who may or may not be opposed to spaying & neutering for health reasons doesn’t seem quite right.

I agree there’s a problem with shelter overpopulation, but I don’t agree that we have a solution yet.

[Countrywood]

My ideas, since hand wringing is not a solution

. It would not be rocket science to separate out conformation and sport breeding and make categories of exceptions for those groups. More money for enforcement and perhaps to help dog owners over rough patches or for training, I don;t know, solutions have to exist somewhere.

[cbv]

So…I know adequate numbers are hard to come by. But I just did some googling and some back of the napkin calculations. And by my math…and I have done this analysis using a number of different sources…

If you take the stats for number of dogs estimated in shelters, subtract the number adopted or returned to owners, and compare (divide by) the number of pet dogs. The total on an annual basis is about 1.5 percent.

There are also data out there that show the number of dogs in shelters has declined significantly, per capita, due to spay neuter programs.

We have to assume some percentage of the dogs in shelters that are not adopted probably should not be adopted. I did read info on a site that (did not cite sources so can’t assess veracity of data) but suggested that due to success of spay neuter programs, fewer dogs in shelters were “whoops” puppies and more were behavioral problems (on a relative basis) so as a percentage less adoptable than the bad old days.

So point is that shelters and abandoned dogs are very small percentage of pet dogs. Shelters and abandoned dogs could never meet demand. Most pet owners are responsible, they occupy a normal curve like every other large population, and spay neuter programs have made a difference.

Given the population in the US, even 1.5 percent is a large number of dogs in shelters. And with the Internet we are barraged with the images.

But be careful what you wish for. Strict limits on dog breeding (which let’s face it we do not have the public support or funds to enforce) may simply result in less pet ownership. Breed clubs, sport enthusiasts etc fuel much of the veterinary research, as does the pet industry. Fewer breeders less funding. Fewer kids growing up with dogs, less tolerance of dogs. More allergies to dogs so less dog ownership, less money for vet research, fewer dog owners and so it goes.

And I am an ecologist. Sportsman and hunters, many who hunt at least in part because of the partnership with a hunting dog, have been integral to many conservation and open space efforts. No dogs, no hunting, less motivation for conservation.

A recent study I read (again cannot vouch for how well designed a study it was) found a substantial number of respondents gave up a pet due to housing issues. And that pet ownership declined during the study period due to economic downturn and fewer people owning their own homes. And there seems to be a relationship between median income, education, and animal welfare issues. So maybe the best way to decrease shelter populations is increase education and job opportunities rather than trying to micro-regulate breeders.

[khall]

Spay neuter laws can and do have exceptions for show dogs/working dogs, they do here in middle Ga. I do not think that is a real issue IMO, the biggest issue would be enforcing the laws to spay and neuter.

This I think would be more appropriate, educating and supporting the public as well as laws that prod them into altering their animals. Their is a big PB rescue in ATL http://www.friendstotheforlorn.org that are big on helping the public with their animals with vaccinations and altering them.
http://www.animalfarmfoundation.org/pages/Pet-Owner-Support

[Sswor]

A hearty amen to that, cbv.

In my area, they ship dogs in from down south to adopt out. Along with their diseases and heartworm too, how nice. There’s a healthy business in it. It’s very trendy, the thing to do. Independently wealthy single suburban women adopt whole packs of shelter dogs and post adoption pics of rescue pets to solicit others on social media. Don’t shop, adopt! Why? They are shipping dogs in from 500 miles away for $400 “adoption” fees with applications as long as my leg and 8wk old spay and neuter mandates. All for a dog you don’t have a shred of real info on other then a professional -donated to feel good cause for tax write off- adorable photo and a cutesy bio with a breed mix listed that avoids admitting -there’s definitely a pit bull in there somewhere- at all costs. No thanks.

[snowrider]

[QUOTE=Countrywood;8620750]
There are a zillion places that don’t allow pets , simply rent a place that does not allow pets and no worries. I’d worry far more about who my neighbors are than what kind of dogs they own. I had to live next door to dangerous neighbors at two places I owned ( in so called good neighborhoods). Let alone who is living next door in a rental…some landlords screen better than others and some people pass a bg check but are still nuts ( or loud and disruptive)

The fear of a dog bite is way out of proportion and often happens by by a person being careless, petting a dog they dont’ know, allowing a child to run up to it etc.

I will say there is a problem with dog on dog aggression, pit bulls and any breed. But pits seem to do more serious damage but not always, dog on dog aggression can get very nasty no matter the breed. That’s a natural instinct with dogs so have no idea how to solve it as dogs are out in public and must pass each other on street, in yards etc unlike pet cats who mostly live indoors or stay in a small area near their own house.[/QUOTE]

My friends condo/ rental association adopted breed restrictions to keep a certain kind of person out. It’s a nice place but older and the rents are relatively cheap. They had several instances of renters being shady and adopting breed legislation has allowed them one more reason to deny people. Probably not totally kosher but technically legal. I very much doubt they are the only landlords to do so.

[french_fry]

[QUOTE=Sswor;8623131]
A hearty amen to that, cbv.

In my area, they ship dogs in from down south to adopt out. Along with their diseases and heartworm too, how nice. There’s a healthy business in it. It’s very trendy, the thing to do. Independently wealthy single suburban women adopt whole packs of shelter dogs and post adoption pics of rescue pets to solicit others on social media. Don’t shop, adopt! Why? They are shipping dogs in from 500 miles away for $400 “adoption” fees with applications as long as my leg and 8wk old spay and neuter mandates. All for a dog you don’t have a shred of real info on other then a professional -donated to feel good cause for tax write off- adorable photo and a cutesy bio with a breed mix listed that avoids admitting -there’s definitely a pit bull in there somewhere- at all costs. No thanks.[/QUOTE]

I almost foster failed with a southern dog that was shipped up to the northeast so he wouldn’t be euthed in an overcrowded shelter for no other reason than that people a. refuse alter their dogs b. refuse to stop letting their unaltered dogs roam loose c. purposely breed for backyard mixes that there is absolutely no market for.

We just do not have that kind of overbreeding problem up here - mostly due to logistics. We don’t have rural areas where dogs can roam and intermix. We end up with a huge amount of pitbulls because that seems to be the one exception that no one spays/neuters and while they are fabulous dogs, they can have a terrier’s tendency to be dog reactive and dog aggressive and many of them take a lot of management from experienced owners for that reason. With those logistical considerations combined with landlords’ and insurance companies’ refusal to deal with a bully breed, that disqualified them from my options.

Every week when the southern shelters and rescues are tagged in the adoption photos from the rescue I work with up here, they marvel at how X dog had been in foster for 4 months down south with zero interest and was adopted within his first week of being in NY. Or a throwaway mama whose puppies were all adopted had been on the euth list at her southern shelter and got on a transport at the last minute and found a family practically as soon as she stepped off the van.

I actually ended up with a mutt from Puerto Rico, which I assume you’ll think is worse. The rescue found her dragging her hind legs on the street after being hit by a car some indeterminate amount of time earlier. She had to have orthopedic surgery, several weeks of convalescence in the shelter, was spayed and got UTD on all vaccinations while there, and was commercially flown to the northeast. Once she was her they got her in with a specialist to get a second opinion on her leg. Her adoption fee was $300 and they halved it for me because I fostered with the organization. But yeah, her rescue really turns a profit on flying in all those dogs! :lol:

Maybe they should have humanely euthed her and spent the money on healthier dogs, I don’t know. I’m sure glad she’s here with me though.

[khall]

french fry, I agree with you on transporting dogs from south to up north, even Puerto Rico which is a US territory. (I do have issues with overseas dogs as much as it pulls at my heart strings to see the dog meat trade dogs) Seems like there are a few posters here and I have met a few IRL that are anti rescue dogs, anti transporting dogs, just ridiculous claims with no merit. I called one out IRL over her claim rescue was doing so to make $, pointed out that the rescue person who was posting looking for puppies that needed homing (they ship up north) was not doing to make $ considering her husband is a millionaire with his own jet. (She ended up unfriending me and deleting my post) Rescuer is working in rescue to save dogs lives not to make $. Some rescues are not above board, can be hoarders, but the majority of them are in rescue to save animals lives not to make $.

[french_fry]

[QUOTE=khall;8623478]
french fry, I agree with you on transporting dogs from south to up north, even Puerto Rico which is a US territory. (I do have issues with overseas dogs as much as it pulls at my heart strings to see the dog meat trade dogs) Seems like there are a few posters here and I have met a few IRL that are anti rescue dogs, anti transporting dogs, just ridiculous claims with no merit. I called one out IRL over her claim rescue was doing so to make $, pointed out that the rescue person who was posting looking for puppies that needed homing (they ship up north) was not doing to make $ considering her husband is a millionaire with his own jet. (She ended up unfriending me and deleting my post) Rescuer is working in rescue to save dogs lives not to make $. Some rescues are not above board, can be hoarders, but the majority of them are in rescue to save animals lives not to make $.[/QUOTE]

Khall, I wish we could get your fosters up here with one of the rescues I work with! Unfortunately we get a ton of pittie mixes locally and full grown cattle dog types are nearly as hard to place. I’ll keep an eye out for a rescue that could take them though!

While there are definitely unscrupulous rescues (and I would encourage anyone who considers adopting a dog to do just as much research about their rescue of choice as they would about a breeder), rescue is absolutely not a way to make a quick buck no matter how you slice it. Sure, some of the dogs get shipped straight up from Georgia, get a free/low cost spay/neuter and are adopted for $400 before they’ve been in foster care for a week. If you take a very narrow view, that particular dog probably wasn’t “worth” $400 because the rescue didn’t put all $400 into it. But on that same transport, a dog could end up needing heartworm treatment or a complicated spay or an intensive dental and would be “worth” $3000 if you judge that based on what the rescue puts in. In order for rescues to not go belly up after taking one transport, they have to split the average cost across all of the adoptable animals.

In addition to spreading the costs across all of the adoptable animals, less adoptable dogs like bully breeds and seniors are subsidized by the adoption fees of puppies and other more “desirable” dogs. Rescues are very upfront about this. It’s not a secret, and if it offends you you certainly don’t have to adopt from that particular rescue. If you hate the idea that your $500 adoption fee for your poodle mix is supporting a pit bull, you can find a niche rescue that adopts out only certain types of dogs or go straight to a breed rescue.

I see the accusation that rescues are “selling puppies” all the time on this board and I try to stop myself from replying because it is just the most narrow-minded viewpoint.

[chism]

[QUOTE=french fry;8623501
I see the accusation that rescues are “selling puppies” all the time on this board and I try to stop myself from replying because it is just the most narrow-minded viewpoint.[/QUOTE]

We adopted a 4 year old GSD from a rescue last year. His adoption fee was $300. He’d been at the shelter for close to 2 years. I didn’t blink an eye at the price tag, even though I’m certainly not a person that considers that a small sum of money. I’m sure they spent more than that on his care. For every easily adoptable dog, there’s one (or more) that needs more time, more care, more $$ spent. Some people simply can’t see the forest for the trees.

[khall]

chism and french fry, bless you for saying what you did re puppies and rescues! I just cannot understand anyone who professes to love and care about animals complaining about puppies or southern dogs getting forever homes up north! I know on the transports north the dogs have to have health cert and appropriate vaccines for their age and be heart worm neg and have been out of the shelter 3 weeks before transport.

Both of my fosters were HW+ and have since been treated. Yes even Sage who was 7-8 months old was mild + when she was pulled from shelter. Lou initially tested neg but then upon second testing (have to have 2 HW tests 6 months apart neg to be considered HW free) tested + and underwent treatment. All but 1 of my adult fosters were HW+ and were treated appropriately for the issue using AVMA approved treatment.

Sigh it is an unending issue here in the south, how I ended up with all 4 of my personal dogs, 3 of which were road finds that had been dumped.

French fry, does your rescues ever do cats? I have a young maybe 1 yr old orange tabby fully vetted that I need to rehome, I picked him up on the road just up from my house. Yes, I rescue/foster cats and kittens as well! Though not as often. He is not with a rescue I personally vetted him, but do need to find him a home. Loves dogs, unsure of other cats, loves people as most oranges do.

For me it is about the animals, period. I just want what is best for them hoping they find their forever homes. I have to say though that pit bulls have a special place in my heart, they are tough resilient dogs with big hearts.

[cbv]

Just to be clear in case I am misunderstood. I am not against rescues or dogs being transported north. My SIL works with a lab rescue that often transports dogs.

I do however, like to see some numbers to go with the many claims I see. I also feel we can acknowledge things have gotten much better while continuing to do more to educate and decrease the unwanted pet population.

And average pet owners – whether they purchase or adopt are not the enemy–in fact the point of my post is something people should take some comfort from. That unwanted pets are a very small proportion of the pet animals in the US.

I live in the rural south. I have lived in New England. Different worlds but both full of good people. However many of my neighbor’s here face economic and social challenges not common in New England, and are still good people. Are their stray dogs here? Yes. But we are not overrun and my neighbor’s are not the enemy.

It is also often a rural vs urban. I have a foot in both worlds. My neighbor’s hunt with hounds. The relationship is not the same as I have with my pets but just because they keep dogs differently does not make them bad people. I saw an older gentleman at the feed store admitting to someone that after the hounds he currently has are gone he won’t replace them. I swear he had a tear in his eye and a catch in his voice.