The Unwanted - Page 9

  THATS AWFUL JEN .

I would agree with many that having a perfectly healthy pup PTS is in no way, IMHO an acceptable solution. 

I do not breed and have no interest in ever doing such but I would think that one might consider looking at perhaps donating the pup to a rescue if such a rescue would be receptive. They could then at least place the dog into a home (which most likely if it is a reputable rescue, would have met many criteria) and at least have an adoption fee to help offset their already extraordinary operating costs. Everyone here would win: most importantly - the pup, the new owners, the rescue, and the "breeder".

My two cents. I am still appalled that some would rather PTS a perfectly healthy pup that they bred and should therefore be responsible and accountable for placing rather than seeking some alternative solutions, of which there are some out there.  Sad....very sad...

So you believe handing this animal off to another, is taking responsibility for that animal?
Out of sight out of mind.
No, it is the easy way out for many.
Now you know why the shelters are full, and the ones who do get homed have no better odds than they came in with.
Sending a puppy to a shelter may ease your conscience but its not responsibility or making sure of the animals future.
No one ever said it was easy.


And yes, its a sad thing.
But thats life.

"Sending a puppy to a shelter may ease your conscience but its not responsibility or making sure of the animals future."

I agree that simply sending or dumping to a shelter is not an appropraite action - however, networking with a shelter or reputable rescue is an entirely different case in scenario than "dumping/dropping off" a pup into the shelter system.

For example, there are often people on waiting lists at both shelters and rescues who have been screened and approved for adopting. Therefore, if networking is successful, the pup does not end up in the system eating up the resources of the agency, but rather it is placed into a home.  Does this not pose a much more chance of being a win-win situation for the pup at the end of day? Who does this really end up being about? The breeder? The pup who is at risk for being sentenced to an unfair death? Morally, what is right? I know that each of us will have a different view on this, but if we take all personal opinions out of the picture and place the health pup's well being first and foremost - what is the right answer?

I think it is completely irresponsible to figure that euthanzing a healthy pup is more responsible that trying to home it to somewhere where it has an excellent chance for a happy life. I ask where is the harm in that? Is a breeder who makes such an effort to prevent killing a healthy pup for lack of wanting or being able to financially (or otherwise) keep the pup less responsible than one who euthanizes the pup? I would commend such a breeder for making the extra effort to go this route instead. Is it because it is easier to simply euthanize rather than spend time and effort trying to place into a home without making a profit on a sale? Well too bad - the breeder needs to be aware that this may be a probability and if he or she is not prepared to look to alternative solutions, then IMHO he or she should not be breeding in the first place and/or he or she should take it as a lesson learned and reconsider that breeding may not be for them if they cannot ensure placement of the pups and/or are not able or willing to commit to their breedings.

My thoughts. No one needs to agree - it may be another one of those having to agree to disagree.

All good views and opinions.
Lots of responces.
Now, your out of options, you (can't) keep the animal for whatever reason and no home can be found.
Remember, for whatever reason you can't keep the animal.
Shelter ?
If the answer is yes I have made my point.
Let someone else deal with it.
Yes we do agree to disagree here.

"Now, your out of options, you (can't) keep the animal for whatever reason and no home can be found. Remember, for whatever reason you can't keep the animal.
Shelter ?
If the answer is yes I have made my point."

I still say the answer is no....simply because I would say that no/not enough effort was made to find placement for the pup. Seriously, there are way more options out there than simply dumping the pup at a shelter:

1) Network with shelters re: possible waitlists
2) Network with various rescue re: possible waitlists
3) Get out to some GSD clubs and talk to members
4) Network with other breeders (remember if one is a reputable or responsible breeder, I am quite sure one would presume to have be some ties/relationships with other reputable breeders)
5) Rethink options in terms of offering a lower purchase price with the monies being donated to a shleter or rescue instead of for profit and do your own screening.

If the pup is in fact a healthy PB GSD (and in particular, from working or show lines), let's not play games - there is always a home for such a pup if one is willing to go the extra mile to make this happen if one is not willing to hang on to the pup until a suitable home is found.  I cannot see a good pup from decent breeding being "unwanted" if the above mentioned avenues are fully taken advantage of and utilized for what is best for the pup in the end...that is of course, unless the healthy PB GSD that has no issues in reality does have issues that are not being disclosed. But of course, for the breeder, it is probably easier to just have the pup euthanized than it is to put in the time and work to place it into a home. Yes?

Well,
In the real world great dogs of several breeds, and great horses are PTS regularly.
This may come as a shock to some, but its true.
You hear about the horses sometimes if there was a lot of money riding on him,but you don't hear about dog racing as much, or Rodeos, Shelters put them down too, no sense in hiding that, dog fighting still goes on in this country as well, sometimes the loser doesn't go home.
Animals with (good) homes are not cared for properly half the time,  maybe more.  I've seen too many nice people not take proper care of their pets.
Farm animals are culled and animal are injured sometimes its economics pure and simple for putting one down.

You ever wonder if your bacon or steak once had a name (4H)
Death in and of itself is not a bad thing.   Misery and suffering is.
I can account for the where abouts of every animal I've ever raised.

Animal shelters are not the answer.
I've never liked some of their methods, I bet you don't know some of the ways they put an animal down.
Then there's the terror the dog goes through waiting, they know more than you think.
If you don't want the burden, then I say to some of you, maybe you shouldn't have animals.
A bit strong,  not to me.
There's too much suffering already man and beast.
Too many overflowing shelters whining for money when they are part of the problem.
Growing up we had the dog pound, all dogs from an area went to one place.  You had two weeks to claim your lost dog.
People knew they could buy a dog there.  But at the end of two weeks the dog was destroyed. 
The problem was again methods, but he idea is sound.
Back to money once more.  I pay a dog taxes, I get nothing for them in return.
Your answer was yes BTW.

I would like to see a perfectly  HEALTHY GSD in a rescue and atleast have a  CHANCE  to have a good life then to be PTS and have no chance ."CHANCE" IS A GOOD NAME FOR  A DOG OR PUP IN THIS SITUATION . YUP CALL IT  "CHANCE" .