I don't understand why...

There IS no original topic - I withdraw my rant. 

I'm understanding that...

Regardless of how poorly trained or poorly behaved a dog may be, I think SD has the talent to bally well FIND something good and positive to reward and encourage.

I think it is sad if that the same talent for winkling out positives is not applied to two legged clients, or indeed this thread. 
 

spiritdogs

Good dogs are those that have an inherently stable temperament, such that they do not pose a risk to the public.  That doesn't mean that they are trained, or housebroken, or that they don't have any behavior issues whatsoever.  It does mean that you don't save a dog with separation anxiety (that will destroy someone's home, or be rehomed five more times without the owners telling why, so that the dog won't be PTS, only to have it be TS when the fifth owner can no longer take it) when you have a dog in the next kennel slated for the dead bin because of space concerns. 

I think a "stable temperament" can only be determined when the dog is in a stable environment, a familiar environment.  Unstable temperament could mean the dog had a "stable temperament" and has not learned how to cope with an unstable environment...and I think that the dog would go back to basic survival instinct behavior to get back the stable environment.  I see this time and time and time again. 

Dogs are social animals and need to have companionship.  Every dog, every dog has some degree of SA within, for some well hidden but for sure it is there.  A SA dog is an ill dog and it is the human that created this and let the dog go to the extreme condition.  Compassionate dog owners who want to help should be able to reverse this without someone pointing out that the resources could be spent saving other dogs.  I did this with Marvin, a hound and no other dog was PTS because I chose to rehab this particular dog.

How many dogs could you have placed in the same time period that you devoted to the dogs who did have severe problems, had you had an evaluation process in place?  Just because you saved ten, doesn't mean that you couldn't have saved twenty!

Zero, none, niets, aucun, kein, nessuno, nenhum, ninguno.  The way that it works here, I can house comfortably up to 4 foster dog and 3 residence dog.  I can not bring in all 4 at once because I would be overwhelmed.  I bring in one foster, mostly observe and focus on building a relationship with the dog for about month.  The dog gets acclimated to the house, integrates with the pack, learn the house rules, and gets use to routines and structure.  Once the dog is stable and acclimated, then I can get a 2nd foster and do the same thing.  Normally, a foster turn around for being adopted is three months so I should always have two foster dogs, one that is stable and the other working on being stable.  Some adoption turn-around is longer and sometimes the turn-around is shorter.  This past winter I had 4 foster with Sheba being the newest foster.  See that is why I could bring in Sheba because the other fosters are stable and the other fosters include a "cured" SA hound.  Anyway, all 4 dogs got adopted in February-March, leaving me with no fosters.  Since that time I have had only one foster at a time because the dog gets adopted before the 3 month average.  Do you see how someone can take in a very needy dog with severe problems and not have that dog take the place of many other dogs slated for PTS? 

Anyone with the guts, just take a look at dogsindanger.com.  Many of those poor dogs have no issues at all, except that they had no home.  Sheba was a temperamentally sound dog that you did help save, and those are the dogs that die every day in the south -

Only if you believe what is written in the profile and for most of the dogs on dogsindanger.com, very little is written.  If you recall Sheba, 4 people that communicated back to us describe her temperament different.  And also, if you recall, Sheba has hip displasia and urinary incontinence and is on medicine for life.  The family that adopted Sheba after about two months with me adopted her because of her display of affection to me and I believe because of her medical condition.  Its so nice to present a pill to a dog and then the dog takes the pill happily.  If I am reading your position correctly, Sheba would be on your list to PTS in favor for saving other dogs.  These are hard calls and I feel it is not my place to make them.

Should we euthanize ten Lassies so that we can save one Cujo?

If you simple change the dog's name from Cujo to Lassie, then your sentence makes no sense and they all need to be saved.

My rescue organization is changing.  They are looking at shelters and trying to find dogs that have been in a shelter for over a year.  The organization is trying to help those dogs that are hard to place.  They are overlooked just because they were born as a black dog or has let go of their youth.  A lot of the families in the organization have been doing this fostering for years and their experience with with dog is invaluable. 

spiritdogs

The dogs need to be able to fit into the average household with kids, because that's who your average adopter is.  This argument makes no sense.  Think about it.  Should we euthanize ten Lassies so that we can save one Cujo?

I completely agree they need to fit in where they are going.  But, you might think differently if you've loved one Cujo type already.  It's a little more work and maybe a little harder to find the right home but just as worth it to that right person. 

Hopefully, that made sense.

Aww, Lori - I have a friend who also adopted and dedicated her life to a "Cujo."  He's not actually that bad, he'd make it here just fine.  But we avoid this topic, because she sees no difference between her high maintenance dog and one that cannot be integrated into anything resembling a normal household - even a dog-centered one.

I think a "stable temperament" can only be determined when the dog is in a stable environment, a familiar environment.  

Heavens no.  Please don't ever breed dogs!  Sound temperaments should be able to absorb most shocks.  That's what seperates a sound canine mind from an unhealthy one.  Dogs with sound temperaments possess healthy coping mechanisms.  That doesn't mean they act like nothing's going on - healthy coping behaviors are very wide ranging (and include behaviors like "hoarding" resources after deprivation, like the water-drinker you described, and even the shy or mouthy dog in the shelter).  Pros can seperate these from the unhealthy behaviors.  The heartbreak is that most shelters don't have access to professional help in evaluating dogs.

What to do?   In spite of your optimism, we don't have enough room to save every dog in this country.  We'd have to bring in the resources of the entire world to meet the need for homes for the volume of homeless pets that now exists.  I don't have the figure, but I read somewhere that everyone in the country would have to adopt two or three animals to house them all - that includes seniors in full care facilities, people in the hospital, and infants.

The most "savable" animals will be the ones that take the shelter/rescue environment in stride.  These are the dogs that are nearly foolproof.  That's good for the average joe, who just wants a buddy for the kids.  Then there's hard luck cases - older dogs, unattractive dogs, sick dogs, but still nice.  Rescue can do awesome things to fill that niche.  

Then there's purebreds who have specific needs but don't show well in the shelter for whatever reason.  BC rescue has been around so long, not because we had a lot of dogs in this country, but because there was such a need to step in and make sure purebred BCs made it into homes that understood what they were getting into.

Then there's dogs that have minor issues - fixable things or possibly fixable things.  Shelter workers can often see that a dog will do much better outside the shelter.  I've gotten plenty of those calls.

In some of our southeastern shelters, we often don't really get past the first two or three categories of dogs we can save.  There's three shelters around me and you wouldn't believe the crap they go through just trying to save a few of them.  There's BYB puppies aplenty - who thinks to go to the shelter - unless you bred a litter and need to drop off the "extras" - or bought a BYB puppy and  are sick of it.  I feel terrible for them.  I was there a couple weeks ago and got to talking with one employee and she just about started crying.  There was a dog she wanted to save, so badly, but its time was almost up.  She already had too many at home.  I promised her I'd ask around.  Unfortunately the family I knew for sure was looking for a puppy had meanwhile purchased a BYB puppy from some random person at Walmart.  Unbelievable.

If we squeeze 'em in with shoehorns and still aren't getting the "cream of the crop" - how can we realistically raise the battle cry - We can save them all!  

brookcove

I think a "stable temperament" can only be determined when the dog is in a stable environment, a familiar environment.  

Heavens no.  Please don't ever breed dogs!  Sound temperaments should be able to absorb most shocks.  That's what seperates a sound canine mind from an unhealthy one.  Dogs with sound temperaments possess healthy coping mechanisms. 

Heavens yes.  Please don't PTS because the dog appears to you to be of unsound temperament.  What a mistake that would be.  Dogs are resilient, dog will get back to normal, some need more time than others.  Temperament is most definitely influenced by the environment.  Just like everything else in a dog's life, some dogs need to learn how to cope.  And they do succeed and there is a place for every dog, we just need to do the effort to find that home for the dog. 

DPU

If you simple change the dog's name from Cujo to Lassie, then your sentence makes no sense and they all need to be saved.

I'm confused.  Are you saying that changing the dog's name would change who the dog is?  Because that's not true.  If you're saying that changing the words changes the meaning of the sentence, that is true and the basis of language.

Benedict

DPU

If you simple change the dog's name from Cujo to Lassie, then your sentence makes no sense and they all need to be saved.

 

I'm confused.  Are you saying that changing the dog's name would change who the dog is?  Because that's not true.  If you're saying that changing the words changes the meaning of the sentence, that is true and the basis of language.

True to both of your statement.  The name Cujo is a subjective labeling that happens way too often to dogs.  It is also true that the name Lassie is also a subjective labeling   And, if the human treats a dog like a Cujo the dog may respond like a Cujo and I believe the vice versa is true.  My latest foster was labeled by her previous foster family a "Cujo", a wild uncontrollable dog.  When the dog came into my home and after a few hours, this "Cujo" is well on her way to becoming a Lassie-type.

DPU

True to both of your statement.  The name Cujo is a subjective labeling that happens way too often to dogs.  And, if the human treats a dog like a Cujo the dog may respond like a Cujo and I believe the vice versa is true.  My latest foster was labeled by her previous foster family a "Cujo", a wild uncontrollable dog.  When the dog came into my home and after a few hours, this "Cujo" is well on her way to becoming a Lassie-type.

Ah.  That's not changing who the dog is, that's changing the perception of who the dog is.  The latter is important (though mishandled can be dangerous) but is not the same thing as the former.  All your story indicates is that the original family had the wrong impression of the dog, not that being in your house gave the dog an instantaneous personality transplant.  That's not a negative, such an immediate change would be an unfair thing to expect of any animal.

DPU

brookcove

I think a "stable temperament" can only be determined when the dog is in a stable environment, a familiar environment.  

Heavens no.  Please don't ever breed dogs!  Sound temperaments should be able to absorb most shocks.  That's what seperates a sound canine mind from an unhealthy one.  Dogs with sound temperaments possess healthy coping mechanisms. 

Heavens yes.  Please don't PTS because the dog appears to you to be of unsound temperament.  What a mistake that would be.  Dogs are resilient, dog will get back to normal, some need more time than others.  Temperament is most definitely influenced by the environment.  Just like everything else in a dog's life, some dogs need to learn how to cope.  And they do succeed and there is a place for every dog, we just need to do the effort to find that home for the dog. 

I know you think I'm obtuse about this, but really the issue is TIME.  While you are taking the time to help one dog succeed, which in and of itself is admirable, you could probably have rehomed ten dogs that didn't need quite so much rehab.  And that, my friend, is not fair to the ten dogs that could have been saved had you opted not to take on just that one dog that was in need of serious rehab.   

I don't want anyone to get the idea that I am an advocate of not rehabbing dogs.  It's just that in the current climate, I feel the need to save the most dogs I can, and that usually means trying to rescue the ones that have the best chance of being adopted quickly and just keep doing it.  Not letting nice dogs die because they simply run out of time.

Only someone who doesn't understand my posts would assume that I would treat a dog like a Cujo, so I know you couldn't possibly be talking about me.  Labels, as used by me, are only intended to describe which dogs have the capacity for life in the average home and which don't, not whether they could be rehabbed by a trainer/behaviorist and live a successful life, carefully managed.  And not whether I would treat them according to any label.  Jump on the terminology and skirt this issue, though, if it makes you feel better.   

Benedict

Ah.  That's not changing who the dog is, that's changing the perception of who the dog is.  The latter is important (though mishandled can be dangerous) but is not the same thing as the former.  All your story indicates is that the original family had the wrong impression of the dog, not that being in your house gave the dog an instantaneous personality transplant.  That's not a negative, such an immediate change would be an unfair thing to expect of any animal.

Lets see if this makes sense.  In placement activity, the only thing a dog has going for it is how the human represents the dog.  And humans can only represent what they perceive to be the reality based on their actual experience.  The only evidence of that perception is how the dog behaves around the human.  Don't you see how the representation of that dog would be so vastly different, as if there was a personality transplant.

For the record, I do not claim that I have this magical touch that immediately turn dogs around when they come to live here.  I actually do very little to influence the dog and I count on the environment, my home setup, the Danes, and the foster finding their own way to become balance.  The Danes are the one that have the biggest role and they work every day with the fosters, as how it should be....dogs teaching dogs.

Not letting nice dogs die because they simply run out of time.

Before someone jumps on the label "nice" - this is a shorthand, when you deal with having to triage dogs to be taken to safety, for the following contrast:

When you as a general (not specialized like me) rescue, look at dogs in the shelter, and you have one slot you can fill, you have to ask yourself the following question:

What will it take to make this dog adoptable?  Then you look at each dog and take a best guess as to the answer.

Dog A:   A bath

Dogs B-J:  Vet care, a week of basic training

Dogs K-Z:  A few months, or years, of intense training

The hard reality is that if you take Dog A, you can bathe that dog and have it in a pre-approved home within a reasonable amount of time - maybe a week.  After that you can go back for dogs in the B-J group, and begin helping them.  You start with the ones in danger and work your way through.

Sadly, often you can't really get any further than that until the shelter situation "resets to zero."  The need for foster homes usually far outstrips the homes available.  If it's not that way where you are, DPU, good on you.  Come visit the southeast.  I would fear for your sanity, though, if you continued to hold on to the notion that you can save them all.

Triage is a fact of living in a world of physical limitations.  If we could manipulate our reality just by wishing really hard, like in the Disney movies, we wouldn't be talking about this.  I'd be wishing unlimited foster homes into existence, all fully trained with the ability to rehab any type of dog that came along, with unlimited finances for vet care, and unlimited emotional resources to draw on as the job draws on eternally. 

Human medicine, particularly in emergency care services, deal with the ethics of triage all the time.  If I shared your philosophy, what do you suppose would be the reaction if I walked into Duke's Trauma Unit and announced that they had to dedicate equal time and level of care to each arrival, from the child with a broken arm, to the car wreck victim hemorrhaging on the gurney, to the heart patient in defib?  They'd call security and have me escorted to the Psych ward of course.

spiritdogs

I know you think I'm obtuse about this, but really the issue is TIME.

So far in all the years I have fostered, TIME has NOT been an issue and space has not been an issue.  My foster program is time-line based and no dog has been PTS because I chose to rehab or have a foster have an extended stay here.  My program limits my capacity to bring in only one new dog at a time.  And when that dog gets acclimated to its new environment, gets integrated with pack, and knows order and structure, then another dog can come here.  The rehab-place cycle does not stop because a dog may need extended rehabs.  And the dog is not totally incapacitated because of its issue and needs constant attention to its issue.  Just the opposite, for issues requiring extended time, rehab exercises are done in very small increments.  No dog has ever left here before they were ready and it just so happens when they are ready, there is an adopter that wants the dog.  I have a near perfect record in placement and no returns.

I can see where you think that if you have a long term foster not being adopted for some reason, then that foster is taking the place of 10 others that could be saved.  That does not happen here because of my proven time-line program which works for the "good" dogs as well the "issue" dogs.  If I was to shorten the time-line program then I would reach capacity fast and have to somehow move dogs out before they are ready to be adopted.  I would then have the unpleasant task of picking and choosing only "good" dogs.  Right now, I have no input as to which dog comes here and I like that.  I would also be very uncomfortable in representing a dog I do not know and I would most definitely be passing along unobserved behavior problems to an adopter.  Isn't this scenario what you complained about, irresponsible placing. 

I am probably not communicating well again, so maybe someone else can explain....but then again I really do think differently from most.

brookcove

When you as a general (not specialized like me) rescue, look at dogs in the shelter, and you have one slot you can fill, you have to ask yourself the following question:

What will it take to make this dog adoptable?  Then you look at each dog and take a best guess as to the answer.

Dog A:   A bath

Dogs B-J:  Vet care, a week of basic training

Dogs K-Z:  A few months, or years, of intense training

The hard reality is that if you take Dog A, you can bathe that dog and have it in a pre-approved home within a reasonable amount of time - maybe a week.  After that you can go back for dogs in the B-J group, and begin helping them.  You start with the ones in danger and work your way through.

I see you making a quick assessment as to which dog fits in which category.  Not possible to get it right IMO.  My proven time-line program takes a shelter dog and permanently keeps the dog out of the shelter system.  Your Darwin style approach of Natural Selection has the element of risk of the dog being returned to the shelter system.  Which way has more of an impact?  I know in my way, I am not rushed, I have no guilt from choosing, no dog gets PTS because I chose "K-Z", and fostering and rehabbing is much more enjoyable and makes you want to continue. 

Most of the fosters in our program come from the south, Ohio, and now we are taking some from the west.