Taking the value out of a dog

[Jax08]

It seems to me that you might be taking this thread a bit personally and I'm not going to get into an argument because what I'm saying is being twisted. Sandra is referring to the animals losing value because they can not reproduce, along with that are the people that only place value on animals if they are winning.

I clearly stated that not all people in animal sports view animals that way. Nobody, not in any post on this thread, implied that selling a dog means the dog has no value. Not in any sentence at all was that implied.

[Liesje]

Originally Posted by Jax08

That priority is a fault in us and how we view living, breathing, animals as things with a "value" other than just the value of life.

This is what I don't get. Why is it wrong/faulty to assess the value of an animal? Why spay/neuter something you aren't going to own, just because?

[Shade]

Originally Posted by Liesje

This is what I don't get. Why is it wrong/faulty to assess the value of an animal? Why spay/neuter something you aren't going to own, just because?

Are you referring to my post or just in general?

If mine, I already gave my top two reasons: Easier to rehome and to prevent irresponsible breeding. Those aren't "just because" reasons

Even breeding females of top breeders if sold to pet homes can require either the breeder or new owner to spay. That doesn't lessen the value in any way to the right home where they are to be retired

[Liesje]

But that's retired dogs. What about a young dog, not even physically mature (not yet breed surveyed)? I guess if I didn't trust the buyer I just wouldn't sell the dog, period. If the dog is young, breeding quality, then it should be up to the buyer (and/or any conditions that still apply from the original contract) whether or not the dog is altered as part of the sale. I wouldn't neuter a really nice dog just in case. That does as much damaged to the already diluted gene pool.

[RowdyDogs]

I don't have a problem with placing financial value on an animal (clearly, since as I said I do it routinely as part of my job), but I would agree with Jax's statement. I don't think a family mutt has less inherent value than a GSD with impeccable bloodlines and a Schutzhund title. That doesn't mean the GSD's owner is wrong to place a price on the value of their dog, but the mutt is still worth something beyond money, you know? It's two very different ways of assessing value.

I don't know if this is how Jax meant it, but I interpreted that statement to just mean that every animal deserves a good life, regardless of its price tag. The financial value of a dog is something that's kind of made up anyway--look at pit bulls bred for fighting, for example (I can think of many more in the horse industry--the entire US Arabian industry is a cautionary tale about this--but I'm trying to stay away from the horse analogies ).

As far as desexing a dog before rehoming it, I have a hard time criticizing people for that too. Back when I first got my GSD and was trying to rehome him (I found him as a stray and didn't want another dog at the time, but he grew on me after a couple of months ), I interviewed several people who seemed great at first but who I eventually discovered intended to breed him--despite the fact that, being a stray, he has no papers, and that GSD experts even disagree on whether he's actually even purebred! But he looks purebred for the most part (in person, most GSD people think he is, but his photographs incite more disagreement), and they didn't care. Some of these people were even involved in dog sports and like I said, seemed like perfect homes.

Now, Hector clearly wasn't a proven working or sporting dog at that point, but the experience would make me very leery about rehoming an intact animal unless I knew the person they were going to very well. I suspect some of it has to do with the amount of contacts the individual has in the dog world too...I personally didn't have any and still have relatively few, so it's harder for me to reliably vet potential homes. A more experienced and involved owner (someone who is actively involved with sporting, working or breed organizations, I mean) and knows a lot of people might feel a lot more confident rehoming an intact dog.

edit: I do agree with your above post, Liesje. I guess my whole point is that it is very situational and I don't really think anyone should be judged too harshly for their decision about this kind of thing, as long as they're being as responsible as they can. Like I said previously, the only time I really judge is when someone leaves a dog intact and doesn't manage it responsibly, or if they knowingly sold a dog to a puppy mill, something like that.

[Shade]

Originally Posted by Liesje

But that's retired dogs. What about a young dog, not even physically mature (not yet breed surveyed)? I guess if I didn't trust the buyer I just wouldn't sell the dog, period. If the dog is young, breeding quality, then it should be up to the buyer (and/or any conditions that still apply from the original contract) whether or not the dog is altered as part of the sale. I wouldn't neuter a really nice dog just in case. That does as much damaged to the already diluted gene pool.

Oh I agree mostly but the percentage of truly breed worthy dogs is as slim as proper working homes. If every GSD was kept intact "just in case" we'd end up with a lot more oops litters and bad breedings which would be just as damaging to the gene pool would it not?

[Liesje]

Originally Posted by Shade

Oh I agree mostly but the percentage of truly breed worthy dogs is as slim as proper working homes. If every GSD was kept intact "just in case" we'd end up with a lot more oops litters and bad breedings which would be just as damaging to the gene pool would it not?

Dunno, the gene pool is pretty crap already!!

[KristiM]

I'm not sure I really understand the intent of this thread...saying that it is tough to place a sport dog that is spayed in a home where they may want to breed is a pretty obvious satement isn't it?

As far as finding a sport home for a competition quality (sterilized) dog, one may have more luck with the flyball/agility community. I find that they would care a lot less about that, I know several people that have taken dogs (with the intent for high level agility/flyball competition) and the dogs had been spayed or neutered already. I'm not trying to bash one sport community vs the other, it just seems WAY more common to have spayed or neutered dogs competing in these venues.

[Liesje]

Flyball too. Someone on my team will never stop commenting on my dog's nads, it's kind of gross/annoying, lol. I'm guessing it's far more opportunistic to have a flyball or agility dog altered (especially spayed) because we are usually competing at least once a month, even those of us who just do it recreationally and not for serious competition, whereas even those who have decades of SchH experience and have titled many dogs might only trial a few times a year. Some performance events will not even allow females in heat, whereas in SchH they will do quite a bit to accommodate them.

[KristiM]

Lol, I get stuck calling all the agility dogs girls because they are all missing their nads! In schutzhund ALL of the boys were intact, at agility I would say maybe 10% are intact. As far as I know you can't compete in agility with a female in heat. That could really suck if your "top dog" came into season during regionals or nationals...


Sent from my iPhone using Petguide.com Free App