You should never rescue a labrador

[BabyElephant]

So this is one bit of the book that I am reading that I DO NOT agree with. The author states that you shouldn't rescue a labrardor because they will almost certainly have "issues" and that is why their previous owner has given them up. She says that people shouldn't think that they are giving a dog a good home but should think about the issues they are going to face and may have to resolve and will probably have trouble doing so.

Whilst I agree that there may be issues to resolve if you are quite prepared for these then go for it!

It just goes to show you how times have changed since this book was written in the 1970's. I wonder if the author would still say the same thing today????? Perhaps there is more help at hand for unruly labs today? Is training more accessible than it was in the 70's? I have so many thoughts as to why she would have thought this way...

[agilitydog]

That is sad. If I weren't to rescue a lab my Sampson wouldn't be here.

But back in the 70's I'll be the number of dogs that were in resuces were much lower than today and maybe that was the case but it is still sad to say not to rescue.

[Hudsons~Mom]

I also do not agree with that...my parents years ago rescued a black lab that was going to be put down because her owner was murdered and there was nobody to take care of her. So she came home one night with my dad and we named her Boots!!

She was PERFECT, we couldnt of asked for a better dog. I think it is wrong to bunch a whole breed into on opinion....that statment is no diffrent then saying dont resuce a pit because it will eat you.

If it has fur....resuce it if it needs help!!!

[BabyElephant]

Hubby's parents rescued a lab who went on to have 5 puppies! She was the sweetest thing ever.

I'm finding lots of interesting things with this book (for those of you who haven't read my other thread it's a book that was written in the 1970's about labradors) and am sharing them with you as I read.

[FairyDogMother]

If unruly and untrained were a criteria to not adopt a rescue, most would never be adopted as it's probably the #1 reason for giving them up. The humans thought they'd be self trained or something!

[Dauxside]

Originally Posted by BabyElephant

So this is one bit of the book that I am reading that I DO NOT agree with. The author states that you shouldn't rescue a labrardor because they will almost certainly have "issues" and that is why their previous owner has given them up. She says that people shouldn't think that they are giving a dog a good home but should think about the issues they are going to face and may have to resolve and will probably have trouble doing so.

Whilst I agree that there may be issues to resolve if you are quite prepared for these then go for it!

It just goes to show you how times have changed since this book was written in the 1970's. I wonder if the author would still say the same thing today????? Perhaps there is more help at hand for unruly labs today? Is training more accessible than it was in the 70's? I have so many thoughts as to why she would have thought this way...

What an idiot! How many rescues of *any* breed have no issues *rolls eyes* The author should be book-smacked.

[alimel]

I can't believe that Maybe it is the owner with the issues?

[Faith]

i'm sure it's the same now as it was then - that the majority of dogs are in rescue because of stupid humans, not bad animals. too bad she wasn't knowledgable enough to know the difference.

[Save the Pits!]

ALL breeds have issues. Dogs in rescues, dogs not in rescues. I don't agree with her either.

[xcolbi]

I do not agree with that either. I wouldn't have Colbi if I didn't rescue a Lab.