lils mum

Not sure I agree. I know that there has been some success in deterring people like this by the HVCNSW At least it's an attempt

I suggest that you have your friend contact the Hungarian Vizsla Club of NSW for an opportunity to get more information about the breed, breeders, etc. There is a comprehensive information pack that is sent out, and there is always someone willing to talk about how a Vizsla will fit their lifestyle (or not) littleduck - there are unfortunately a LOT of breeders of HV's these days - a significant number of those who are unregistered and couldn't care less where they place their puppies. Even some of the registered ones are really not good. This breed is currently the subject of overpopularity, over breeding, puppy farmers, and inappropriate placement. Working co-operatively, the HVC NSW & HVC V rehome a growing number of dogs each year - more than 20 last year and so many more very young dogs. There are calls for help from people with Vizsla puppies not yet 4 months old - 'I can't cope' so maybe you can get your friend to get in touch and get some 'information on breeders' - it will be so much more.

I wasn't planning to buy into this, but thought that it's probably worth mentioning that I too have had great success with a very sick dog when using 'golden nuggets' from Hills. Several years ago my dog had fulminating liver failure of unknown origin. She was losing weight at the rate of knots, and nothing was palatable for more than a day. Surgery to find a diagnosis was out of the question due to her rapidly failing health - I didn't want to kill her with surgery when her platelets were so diminished, etc. I tried Hills L/D - now, I'm a raw feeding owner - always. but I was desperate. My old girl found that palatable, and she improved immensely - I also used alternative additions such as milk thistle and SAMe. She lived an apparently healthy and normal life for another two years, when once again she started to show signs of inappetance and we found a very large tumour on her liver with u/s. So - not a commercial feeder at all. But would not ever say it's not worth a try for certain situations. I believe that the L/D was part of the extra 2 years we had with that wonderful old girl.

I left mine carefully at the back of my car yesterday, and reversed over it Anyone seen a good deal on them?

http://www.mollymutt.com.au/collections/crate-covers Exxy, but nice

I am aware of a 13 month old dog with hydrocephalus. He has seizures, and he has brain damage due to pressure on his brain from excess fluid causing it to be compressed and 'shrink'. He also has unpredictable behaviours due to the brain damage.

Thanks so muh!

Could you tell me numbers for GSPs, Goldens, Gordon's, Hungarian Vizslas on Sat please?

Anyone got numbers for Canberra?

and for Vizslas - www.gundogpedigrees.com Entries are input by a few dedicated people including an Australian

Deleted response as agree it has nothing to do with this topic

I'm glad that you've got some more information in your toolkit about other breeds/groups, their purpose and history. FWIW, in 2009, the Hungarian Vizsla Club of NSW conducted a health survey. This covered all aspects of health, and if anyone is interested the correlated report can be seen on the club's website www.vizsla.org.au Now, it's not a huge sample size, and the club doesn't necessarily have access to all Vizsla owners, but of the 229 dogs for which questionnaires were completed, 88 dogs were born following implementation of the ban, and 9 (10%) recorded tail injury as a problem. Just what percentage of those went on to amputation, I don't know. For me, though I am probalby what could be considered 'pro docking' (I always say that if neonatal docking were the very worst thing people ever did to dogs, we'd be in a far better place!) , I think that fight is probably long dead. However the issue of this motion was the uninformed and show -centric perspective. 'Exhibition' was taken quite literally by many, excluding consideration of working/trial venues. Where is therapeutic amputation performed - ie, what level of the tail? Where it is therapeutic I would imagine - it's performed by a vet after all. It would vary according to the site and severity of the injury in the individual dog. However, we do know of a number of dogs where (?)overly conservative treatment was the initial choice, and after months of attempting to heal the splits/damage, dogs were frequently subjected to inadequate initial amputation, requiring a second surgery due to failure to heal. The longer the injury is in place and fails to heal, the further the extent of damage to surrounding tissues. Circulation can become impaired within the indurated tissue and chronic low grade infection can also be present. consequently, a number of these dogs have required amputation of significantly more tail than would traditionally docked. More than one vet has expressed the opinion to the owners that had they realised the traumatic and prolonged potential for tail injuries, they would have been far less opposed to tail docking. It should also be considered that most vets don't have a lot of some particular breeds in their practice demographic - they may only ever see one or two tail injuries, perhaps none. As there is no centralised data collection of this issue, it's basically impossible to know the full extent of the problem within the pet/companion/working/showing combined community. Regardless, the motion that has created the flurry of discussion was a poor one.

had that regulation been passed, as I read it , no. Same for situations like the promising Vizsla bitch mentioned in a previous post. If she were born after July 1 2014,and needed her tail amputated she could also not be trialled in Agility, Rally, Obedience, Field, Retrieving Trials etc. or any other dog with a legitimately therapeutically docked tail Sure there may be a problem but this was never the right solution ETA what I find very disturbing is that anyone who should be thinking about all collateral damage ever thought it was.

I think as people have mentioned previously this is apparently a scanned document, with some words corrupted in the scanning process. The issue however is 'the issue' rather than the presentation surely?

As the motion is an electronic one, there won't be a meeting to decide its outcome. And this in itself is a significant problem! My comment above does not refer only to this motion, but to any motion whereby delegates may elect to lodge personal votes rather opinions representative of the body they are meant to be representing.