I am getting frustrated!!

I think there's a difference between owning a "dangerous" or "vicious" dog and owning a "problem" dog. I also think there is a big difference between owners. I had a wonderful foster border collie. She had a problem with strange dogs. One potential adoptee had never owned a dog before. Another potential adoptee had owned dogs for years and have done obedience, agility, etc.

Guess who I adopted the border collie to? I had a sweet little puppy come through a couple weeks later, called the adoptee and said "I found your dog, come and get her".

Both dogs were loved, well-behaved, cared for, etc. Both adoptees were happy with their dogs. I got two lifetime homes for two fosters.

Had I reversed those two dogs, I would have had the border collie come back and would have turned off the person from having a dog. The puppy was going to be fine in either home.

Go Dogs wrote:
Just because someone has owned many dogs, does not necessarily make them an expert.

I absolutely agree.

I'm going with my personal experience. The Alpha theory is not cr*p. Anyone that believes so , has never been able to master it. I've left two females home alone, ( a pit bull and a mastiff; a GSD and a Maltese). Ive worked 12 hour shifts. No crates, no separate rooms. They were asleep back to back when I left, same position when I returned.
And, yes. I would NOT ever own a dangerous dog. I don't care if the dog was abused or not. If a dog has bitten or is likely to bite in certain situations. No thanks. There are other dogs more deserving of a good home without endangering the public.
I'm not speaking of special medical needs. I'm referring to extreme, potentially dangerous behaviors. I've dealt with plenty of blind, deaf, lame etc. It's not right to own a dog that cannot be controlled.
Just because someone has owned many dogs, does not necessarily make them an expert.

toedtoes, you are so right!! Thank you

xteacher, I totally agree with you on the special needs dogs don't mean the dog is unadoptable. We have one now that since 2007 she must have chemo shots every 3 weeks plus she must have insulin 2x daily and due to diabetes she is blind.

Since I know we must be home every night to administer insulin and have been for many years a dog that must be given meds every evening like clockwork doesn't scare us off. In fact this has been part of life for so long it doesn't faze us. All of our family and friends know our dogs come first over anything!!!

Go Dogs wrote:
Some of these criteria are out there. One acre of 6ft fenced property per dog? No females to existing female adoptions? No adoptions to homes with children under 12? One-pet homes, only? The shelter that I volunteer at, have had dogs for over a year, because no one could meet the criteria. I don't agree with that. Not everyone is dog-ignorant. In some instances, exceptions should be made. If the dog is so unadoptable because of behavior problems-someone should make the tough decision.

Special needs doesn't mean the dog is unadoptable. It simply means that the adoptive home needs to be selected carefully. Remember, many of these dogs have come from tough places - they're not always a fluffy little happy lap dog - at least not for awhile, until they learn to trust again. That's why they're in rescue.

All three of my dogs fit into this category. My boxer, Jackson, isn't good around other big dogs while on leash, but gets along famously with my little dogs, as well as all people, young and old. He also does well at a well-supervised off-leash doggie day care. He's in love with my infant granddaughter and checks on her frequently when we're babysitting her. He came from the mean streets of a bad side of town, so God knows what he went through before being taken to Animal Control; big dogs scare him, even though he's big himself.

My toy poodle, Sunny, lived in a hoarding situation for 7 years before being rescued, and he's frightened of humans. I was supposed to be his foster, but soon realized he needed a special home. A happy go-lucky poodle lap dog, he's not. After almost two years with us, he's making small strides. Do I want to rip my hair out sometimes? Yes, but that won't help Sunny improve. He's been a great teacher of patience, that's for sure.

My little maltese/westie mix, Maddie, is an alpha female and gets along better with males, who she can boss around - lol. I won't foster a female because I'd rather avoid potential problems. It doesn't make me a "weak" owner, just a cautious one!

So... I guess, in your opinion, my dogs should all be put down because they have issues? No, they just needed careful placement with someone willing and able to deal with them. Since each has different problems, and none of them conflict with each other's problems, they all get along well.

Please also keep in mind, that all of us on this forum are experienced dog owners, and we know how to handle and take care of our dogs. The average person who walks up to a rescue and wants to adopt a dog from a rescue doesn't have the experience we do. Therefore, a rescue acts very cautiously and requires proof of responsibility to avoid the dog going though another bad situation and being returned.

With that being said, yes, some rescues are over the top in their requirements. If you run into one of those, move onto another one.

There are many factors that go into whether multiple dogs will get along or not. Neutering/Spaying is a HUGE factor. Breed/temperament is a big factor. Sex as a factor is usually only in combination with one of the other factors.

For example, 2 male unneutered dogs are most likely going to have issues. 2 female akitas are likely to have issues (female akitas are more territorial, prey oriented, etc., than other breed females). An unspayed female may have problems with other females.

Go Dogs wrote:
I've had owned several females at a time, males and mixed sexes. You should be the only Alpha in the house. Then, they follow your lead.

Dominance/alpha theory is crap. Thoroughly debunked by almost all veterinary behaviorists and evolutionary scientists.

Even if it were true, it matters not when the "alpha" is away at work and the dogs are on their own. And no, we won't get into crating. When one is single and frequently working sixteen hour days, crating the three strays you took in out of pity simply isn't an option.

Anyone who believes that it's not true that mixed sexes or males will generally get along better than multiple females should ask their vet or trainer.

Yeah, I don't think you can generalize about dogs of the same or opposite sexes getting along. I think it's more about whether the people they live with give the impression of being in charge.

Pawz4me wrote:

keepmotoring wrote:
Haven't ruled out a male but frankly thought the "alfa" would be more in female to male than female/female.

No, not at all.

In general a male/female will get along much better than female/female.

I've had three females before. There's no way on earth I'd do that again. Ever.

I've had owned several females at a time, males and mixed sexes. You should be the only Alpha in the house. Then, they follow your lead.