westiemum

Westiemum, Re paedophilia: The society we lived in in the days when paedophilia was routinely covered up was a different world. The expectations of the community were not as they are today. Because it was an issue that was taboo for discussion- Sexuality and expectations of sexuality were not discussed. Even families of the victims, or victims themselves often covered up the abuse because sexuality was for behind closed doors and to discuss these matters left people feeling exposed and vulnerable.Dirty. Even to consider the issues. Its open discussion that has lead to the change. Recognition. That human beings are sexual animals with diverse aspects to their sexuality. Recognition of our sexuality and its diverse aspects. THAT has enabled us to form common expectations- That a persons sexuality is their own business, as it should be, until it harms some one else. What constitutes 'harm'. We Recognize the diversity. We accept it AS PART of the HUMAN condition. Unless someone forces another to accept what they can't. Forces their diverse sexuality on another, who is unable for any reason to accept that 'Type' of sexuality. As in a minor who hasn't the maturity, or an adult who simply chooses not to. The same people being pilloried for holding their silence back then, would likely react to the allegations differently today. Because the expectations of the community are better understood. Their responsibility to those expectations are better understood. Such abuses today are less likely to occurr, far more likely to be reported, and far more likely to be acted on. Not because people are better, but because they are more able to respond to the expectations we hold in common. Because the issues were recognized as community or human issue. We discussed the issues to reach agreement. Its not perfect and never will be because we can't control the environment and how it will affect people, based on their diversity.But it keeps improving as our recognition of the common problems does. Through discussion. It didn't happen overnight. Its taken a generation. That seems to be normal in changing expectations. But the average generation of a greyhound racing identity, or a pedigree dog breeder is shorter than that humans life span. The recognition and discussion tho' are needed before anything at all can be done to form to the common expectations, and then for people to respond to them when they are clear. Sadly for the Greyhound industry, dog racing is no longer a common pursuit. Its limited to Greyhound owners. I think change would come given time, but it will still always be out of step with the community, so not viable. Because theres no common expectation to be reached when its always going to be type of dog 1st for the identities involved. That doesn't include the community in the disscussion. Only one type is acceptable to the industries purpose, A greyhound owner type. Pedigree breeders are in the same boat. They recognize a few more types, but they are still not inclusive of community expectations for their purpose. Only pedigree types. Theres no recognition that any one else could share their purpose, so go off on their own and wonder at backlash. Moosmum we will have to agree to disagree. I hope I've understood you correctly. The standards for the treatment of children and animals are set by our society, not select parts of society such as the greyhound industry of it which carve out parts of it for themselves and think they can do what they like. They can't. People have hidden behind the 'it was different times' argument for years. People knew then abuse of young children was wrong and have since said so (and showed by their actions at the time they knew it was wrong) and its still wrong now. The covering up and turning a blind eye to paedophilia is still happening - until recently, I used to deal with it for a community organisation - and no it isn't less common. And people are still turning a blind eye. Read the Nyland Royal Commission report and case study five in particular. Its also evolving into different forms and regardless of diversity IMO the abuse of animals and children is never OK and never has been. As I've said before, IMO the conditions for sustainable change do not exist in this industry. Common expectations are only part of the story. If this industry wants to survive it must change and to change takes leadership, resources and expertise - and a ton of it over time which does not seem to be there. And people are already reporting it's back to 'business as usual' and I have no doubt further evidence of that will be make public sooner rather than later. (Please read previous posts). I take your point about the exclusiveness of the greyhound community - and thats precisely my point too. We live in a society where the views of broader community count and until the industry learns and respects that (which I doubt they ever will if it is back to 'business as usual') their industry will continue to live on borrowed time. Yep. I think we understand each other :D I do think the paedophilia issue is changing for the better, slowly, and is more likely to be reported these days, and will continue to improve, but never be gone either. So we agree to to disagree on that.People are also more aware of its prevalence, so more chance of picking up on it. For the rest, I agree They Greyhound industry is unlikely to ever to meet community expectations because it is so isolated and I can't see that ever changing. especialy this late in the game. Maddy. Asal said it. Its all connected. I am not defending the Grey hound racing industry, though I do regret a whole purpose for keeping dogs is being lost,( and sooner or later, likely the breed) because it was deemed an exclusive 'property' requiring a certain 'type' of person. I prefer they have this chance, tho' I think it will be blown. Because they won't accept that the sport could be turned into a more common one, with more public oversight by doing that.I think it would allow the industry to get in step and stay in step with community expectations, given time. I doubt they have time now. Its an exclusive interest to greyhound owners and I doubt there is any way now to convince them it could be otherwise. They have no wish to respond to the sport in any other way. As for the difference of people not obeying leash laws and people who deliberately encourage a dog to tear a live animal apart- The person who gets attacked, or sees their child atttacked, or their pet torn apart in front of their very eyes because some idiot thought leash laws are for those 'other' people isn't going to make that distinction. Off leash dogs biting, causing accidents, peeing and crapping on other peoples lawns, attacking guide dogs etc is a lot more personal when any one can be exposed to it just walking out their front door. Making money, over producing, most of those other things you listed are NOT exclusive to the grey hound industry. A precedent has been set. A new level of expectation. The Govt. can make problems concerning dogs go away. Theres lots of them. And there are fewer people left to be affected by the 'new standards' each time they are passed. Fewer people left to demonstrate better responses. Pedigree breeders would be smart to notice the similarities. Yep we're on the same page. Although there will be thousands of greys to rehome, I like to think that even without the greyhound racing industry the breed would survive - and possibly evolve into a valued companion breed if enough of us take them on - they are certainly on my list and I suggest them as a rescue option whenever I can. And yes pedigree breeders (and the horse racing industry) would be wise to notice the similarities. If they are smart, through their peak bodies they will self-initiate an industry-wide 'audit' (or something similar) of their members now to identify problems and deal with them so the same thing doesn't happen to them.

Not really but I was hoping. legislation is harder to get around and gives people who complain more power and more places to go to when they do complain. I don't think reforms, research, reviews and smoke and mirrors is what won the day for the industry, these were all present when Baird decided to ban racing, people power is what did it for them, the squeaky wheel etc they were very proactive. If those outside the industry with knowledge on the rot in the industry had stopped sitting on their hands and spoken up and they be the squeaky wheel, they may have been able to keep Baird from changing his mind. Agreed. Good post.

Westiemum, Re paedophilia: The society we lived in in the days when paedophilia was routinely covered up was a different world. The expectations of the community were not as they are today. Because it was an issue that was taboo for discussion- Sexuality and expectations of sexuality were not discussed. Even families of the victims, or victims themselves often covered up the abuse because sexuality was for behind closed doors and to discuss these matters left people feeling exposed and vulnerable.Dirty. Even to consider the issues. Its open discussion that has lead to the change. Recognition. That human beings are sexual animals with diverse aspects to their sexuality. Recognition of our sexuality and its diverse aspects. THAT has enabled us to form common expectations- That a persons sexuality is their own business, as it should be, until it harms some one else. What constitutes 'harm'. We Recognize the diversity. We accept it AS PART of the HUMAN condition. Unless someone forces another to accept what they can't. Forces their diverse sexuality on another, who is unable for any reason to accept that 'Type' of sexuality. As in a minor who hasn't the maturity, or an adult who simply chooses not to. The same people being pilloried for holding their silence back then, would likely react to the allegations differently today. Because the expectations of the community are better understood. Their responsibility to those expectations are better understood. Such abuses today are less likely to occurr, far more likely to be reported, and far more likely to be acted on. Not because people are better, but because they are more able to respond to the expectations we hold in common. Because the issues were recognized as community or human issue. We discussed the issues to reach agreement. Its not perfect and never will be because we can't control the environment and how it will affect people, based on their diversity.But it keeps improving as our recognition of the common problems does. Through discussion. It didn't happen overnight. Its taken a generation. That seems to be normal in changing expectations. But the average generation of a greyhound racing identity, or a pedigree dog breeder is shorter than that humans life span. The recognition and discussion tho' are needed before anything at all can be done to form to the common expectations, and then for people to respond to them when they are clear. Sadly for the Greyhound industry, dog racing is no longer a common pursuit. Its limited to Greyhound owners. I think change would come given time, but it will still always be out of step with the community, so not viable. Because theres no common expectation to be reached when its always going to be type of dog 1st for the identities involved. That doesn't include the community in the disscussion. Only one type is acceptable to the industries purpose, A greyhound owner type. Pedigree breeders are in the same boat. They recognize a few more types, but they are still not inclusive of community expectations for their purpose. Only pedigree types. Theres no recognition that any one else could share their purpose, so go off on their own and wonder at backlash. Moosmum we will have to agree to disagree. I hope I've understood you correctly. The standards for the treatment of children and animals are set by our society, not select parts of society such as the greyhound industry of it which carve out parts of it for themselves and think they can do what they like. They can't. People have hidden behind the 'it was different times' argument for years. People knew then abuse of young children was wrong and have since said so (and showed by their actions at the time they knew it was wrong) and its still wrong now. The covering up and turning a blind eye to paedophilia is still happening - until recently, I used to deal with it for a community organisation - and no it isn't less common. And people are still turning a blind eye. Read the Nyland Royal Commission report and case study five in particular. Its also evolving into different forms and regardless of diversity IMO the abuse of animals and children is never OK and never has been. As I've said before, IMO the conditions for sustainable change do not exist in this industry. Common expectations are only part of the story. If this industry wants to survive it must change and to change takes leadership, resources and expertise - and a ton of it over time which does not seem to be there. And people are already reporting it's back to 'business as usual' and I have no doubt further evidence of that will be make public sooner rather than later. (Please read previous posts). I take your point about the exclusiveness of the greyhound community - and thats precisely my point too. We live in a society where the views of broader community count and until the industry learns and respects that (which I doubt they ever will if it is back to 'business as usual') their industry will continue to live on borrowed time.

Good posts. Patience everyone - as I keep saying it will sort itself out - it will just be a slower death to the industry now, given I believe it's completely incapable of change - and it would seem the 'business as usual' since the removal of the bans just proves my point. And I'm sorry for any 'collateral damage' - but so many of these people stood by and did nothing making them as culpable as the perpetrators of such abject cruelty and misery. asal the paedophile analogy is a good one as exactly the same thing happened there - similarly so many people actively covered it up or turned a blind eye and it took a number of Royal Commissions sadly to get to the bottom it (and sadly I suspect we haven't seen the end of that ) - and those who 'turned a blind eye' are now being seen as culpable as the perpetrators - and the same will happen here - sexual assault of children and young people, abject cruelty to animals - all deserve to have the key thrown away IMO. I don't believe there is one person - not one - on DOL who in the same position as the majority of this industry who would have stood by and done nothing. We are a great community and set high standards for ourselves and our members - and we expect the same from others.

Excellent progress SM - and in my mind you're being so sensible in your attitude and approach to it all. Its often a few steps forward before another one back. And you're rolling with it. Good stuff. And great news about his Lordships weight. Andy needs to follow his lead!

What the RSPCA does or doesn't do, does not excuse the issues in the greyhound racing industry. The RSPCA certainly have a lot to answer for but it's an entirely different issue. We can't say "Ah, but the RSPCA also kills dogs, so there!" because that is not even an argument, it's just distracting from some very real and very serious problems that must be addressed. If you think the RSPCA is bad, you'd be horrified by some of the things I've seen or heard in the racing industry. Absolutely.

I'm sure I don't want to know The problem is that that their marketing is so slick and they work government networks and the public so well its going to be very hard to change. Do you reckon Oscars law animal lib and animals Australia are any different ? Only in the sense that they don't kill 100's of thousands of animals a year for financial/economic reasons and then put their hands out to a gullible public for more money 'for rescue'.

I'm sure I don't want to know The problem is that that their marketing is so slick and they work government networks and the public so well its going to be very hard to change.

Thanks so much for popping along Moosmum - really kind of you and really appreciate it. I know how hard Rainbow Bridge can be. While the searing grief has gone, the tears are still there at unexpected times - and I think that will continue for a while yet. I was setting the date for a gathering of our westie and rescue clan recently for this month, and steered well clear of the 20th which will be 12 months since Mac's death - I wasn't sure how I will be to be honest. It still seems like yesterday. Ruffles posted some lovely words earlier in this thread and they're worth repeating: When you are sorrowful look again inside your heart and you shall see that in truth you are weeping for that which has been a delight - Kahlil Gibran Mac still fills a hole in my heart - and he always will. Thanks again.

Maddy I'm so sorry. We've just lost one of our westies from our westie and rescue group to this insidious disease - she lasted 10 months but believe me while she was well managed it was no real life. RIP beautiful man,c say hi to Mac, he'll show you the ropes.

This was forwarded to me by my son. Shooters, Fishers and Farmers MLC Robert Brown called on an inquiry into the RSPCA during an adjournment speech in the NSW Parliament on Tuesday evening. "This follows a litany of debacles where the organisation has over-reached in its role, and is in the precarious position as an unsupervised judge, jury and executioner for animal cruelty issues. These matters have been examined in Western Australia and Victoria, and should be examined by an inquiry in this jurisdiction." "[People would] be shocked to hear of a $100m industry that slaughtered 40,206 innocent animals in the period 2014 to 2015 - 30 per cent of animals under their care," he said. "The 40,000 animals slaughtered by the RSPCA last year surprises me, especially because a figure of a similar magnitude was cited as the rationale for banning greyhound racing. The cynic in me wonders why they have not released their latest year's statistics, given this debate. "Once a respected charity, it has now become over-zealous, drunk on power, and dominated by animal liberationists. Mr Brown cited the case of Pilliga grazier Ruth Downey whose breeding cattle were shot by the RSPCA following disputable claims they were emaciated. He highlighted quotes of an RSPCA inspector uncovered by his office showing that the organisation preferred to euthanise this woman's cattle rather than provide material support with feeding because the organisation was low on funds. "An organisation... cannot be summarily allowed to execute animals because it is in that organisation's financial interests, rather than providing the support the public demands and deserves. Nationally they reported a $9.34m loss in their latest financial statement. This is despite their charity status and the tax concessions that come with it." "[The RSPCA] can either be a policing body for animal welfare or a campaign-house: but it cannot be both," Mr Brown said. "Like Western Australia and Victoria, we urgently need an inquiry into the RSPCA in New South Wales." Mr Brown added that the issue of the RSPCA's role in animal welfare was of significance because of their role in deciding the future regulation of the greyhound racing industry after the ban was repealed. "The fact that [the RSPCA] is actively campaigning against the continuation of the greyhound racing industry, but is granted a seat at the table by Premier Mike Baird to examine it's future regulation is ludicrous and is fraught with danger. "Such an appointment surely raises community suspicions that the Baird Government's reversal of the greyhound racing ban may turn out to be a disingenuous exercise - killing the industry slowly by other means." Being the curious kind I found the Hansard copy, think it reads better than the press release actually. https://www.parliame...820781676-71409 Probably surprise you asal but I actually don't disagree with Senator Brown - there are many of us here who have believed this for years - that the RSPCA has become a disgusting self-promoting marketing exercise where animal welfare comes a poor second. Paws walk my foot. It's run by a complete bunch of incompetents who wouldn't understand 'conflict of interest' if it stood up and bit them.

Good post Steve - and good discussion on the legalities. Dogs will always be property - but I suspect can be defined ina different way (category?) under the legal 'property' banner. No I don't pretend to know how that could happen - will take a legal brain better than me - but I expect that can happen in line with community expectations and still avoid many of the problems you discuss. Legal reform is happening all the time as community attitudes/norms evolve ahead of it - and community attitudes are important and definable. And yes legislative change often lags years behind - but yes it does happen. Part of the problem with the greyhound industry is that community attitudes and norms seem to have evolved at a far faster rate than greyhound industry attitudes - and thats where the gap, dressed up as class warfare, is huge. The industry has a lot of catching up to do if it wants to survive.

These are excellent questions Corvus and I'm not pretending I know the answers (others are better equipped to answer them than I am) - except to say its really values driven/laden - so given values differ I suspect the answers to your questions will vary widely too, depending on who you talk to. Sorry for the lengthy response but I want to do justice to your excellent post. I come from a horse racing family and my brother worked in the industry for years and profited from blood stock/horses sales. As a young person it didn't occur to me to question it. As I've got older (and I like to think wiser), I've questioned what I believe is the true nature and values which drives humans to profit from animal entertainment (for want of a better word). My values base has clearly changed as I've aged and (and learned) and so my position supporting these industries has shifted from 'acceptable' to unacceptable'. And yes I agree transition needs to happen (second bolded bit) - but when your values don't line up with making that transition to 'other lives' then euthanasia sadly for many becomes the only option. You and I probably wouldn't dream of euthanising dogs 'excess to requirements' but others will see it as their first and only option - and this is unacceptable to the general community. Then there is the moral/right thing to do versus the legal question. And yet as Steve rightly says, dogs are property under the law and owers have the right to do as they like to their 'property' (and herein lies the difficulty with live companion animals as 'property') But then how to legally define 'stock' animals? Hmn...). So clearly the law may need to change to keep up with community expectations. Whether the greyhound industry (and every other animal industry) likes it or not, if they do not adhere to public standards and expectations (which have clearly shited), then they will lose in the 'court of public expectation' and lose their livelihoods. The community has made it very clear that they will not tolerate these levels of animal cruelty and misery anymore, ever. And so I expect legislative/common law change will follow - eventually. And yes I hope the industry deeply understands that and becomes a model animal industry - but I doubt it for all the reasons I've explained in previous posts. So bottom line, clean up and meet community expectations or ship out - there is clearly no middle ground left on this. And given there has been no shift in this industry to produce sustainable change acceptable to the general public then I suspect it will ultimately be an industry shut-down - and yes that will happen - ts only a matter of time.

So are you saying that the short sharp version closed the organisations down completely or they went OS, or was it that the participants just had to change their culture, no compromises, so the industry could survive? The latter m-j usually - it usually involves rapid down-sizing and sophisticated management of change and people - and that so ain't going to happen here. Management by attrition usually takes a long time, and while it works in some situations I doubt it will work here given the public and political pressure. So yes - I have seen absolutely nothing here to suggest that genuine sustainainble change will happen so this industry will survive in a form that is acceptable to the general public. In fact this decision has probably ensured the slow 'death by a thousand cuts' for this industry, unless it happens again. And yes I'm certain it will all happen again and next time it will be a brutal shutdown. Look the truth is that the days of using animals for gambling and entertainment are severely numbered - its only a matter of time given its a toxic mix that brings out the worst in human beings. So this industry can evolve to shutdown under its own control or have it done to it eventually. They can take their pick which route they take - but they are going to end up in the same place. Bookmark it. Thank you for your reply. As I have said before you are probably right except it will be a pity for the good folk in the industry and they do exist and they have complained but it has fallen on deaf ears. The entertainment and gambling factor of the industry are not to blame for this it is the "win at all cost" mentality. Unfortunately it isn't only in the greyhounds it is across the board in all sports, it is why human athletes get drug tested and are being found positive. Gone are the days when sport was just that sport, now it is business, pity. One example of this is country football/cricket they are paying players from other places to play for them so now the kids that don't make the grade instead of being at the footy or the cricket on Saturday they are entertaining themselves in other ways and not all of them are wholesome. Generally m-j I think we are in agreement - I just don't believe so much in 'the good people' - not one public whistle blower I'm aware of in all the years of greyhound racing? But anyway, yes it is a pity that what might have been a good clean fun hobby has now become 'business' - and when it involves animals you can absolutely bet that greed will overrule any sense of animal welfare and decrease our collective humanity. I think this is why I'm so angry with this industry - as it not only reflects on them, it reflects on all of us. And I wonder if the huge outcry over greyhounds is because they are closer to us than, say horses. The are a companion animal species who live in our homes - and while some people have horses as well most of us don't. So it hits hard. And yes absolutely agree - the moment sport becomes 'business' it moves to a different plane. I'm a great AFL supporter - and sooooo angry with Essendon for the disrepute that they have brought to the game through their 'whatever it takes' 'supplements' program. They are a case study for everything m_j talks about. I've seriously considered going back to supporting grass roots footie through the SANFL - and I might still. And no I won't be watching or betting on 'the race that stops the nation' either.

Yes Isabel I'm the same - while I only have purebred westies at the moment, I've had mixed breed rescues which kind DOLers have helped with which I''m fairly sure Troy is happy with - its promoting and advertising mixed breeds on DOL which is not allowed - so please feel free to stay - we'd really miss you if you left.

and, of course, DDD's little red guy; Danny O My, they will have good times Oh yes thank you B - the beautiful Danny!! What a party there must be in heaven!

So Sorry Moosmum. RIP beautiful boy.

Couldn't agree more. Please don't go Isabel. We'll miss you too much.

I really don't know. I am keenly aware that the people that talk to me are the people that are genuinely interested in doing better by their dogs, and most of them were already working towards change, and I have had some good times with them and their dogs. Their passion for change is obvious. It's impossible to see beyond those positive experiences to parts of the industry that I don't see and people I don't talk to. I hope, for all the happy people and dogs I have met in the industry. It is a little bit complicated. Dogs that are not racing are supported at least in part by dogs that are racing. On the outset, it looks like, well, we know most of them don't live past 2 anyway, so if they die at 9 months old instead of 2, what's the difference? At least the cycle has come to an end. And in some cases, particularly large, professional enterprises, that is probably true. In other cases, maybe not. Hobbyists are more likely to be holding onto dogs that are not racing, and there are no figures for how many of them have non-racers still in their kennels, and if so, how many. It could include retired racers, injured dogs, young dogs, dogs on suspension, and failed racers, and it could be a temporary or indefinite arrangement. These dogs are pretty much invisible, so maybe there's just 4 in the entire state, or maybe there's 400. Maybe some of them would have been there all their lives, or may have been sold, or eventually adopted out, or euthanised... Whatever the case, if racing were suddenly ended, people may find that they can't support their non-racers anymore, and I expect some of them keep them because they sank a lot of time into them and grew attached and could afford to keep them. So, maybe it's not just the dogs that would have died anyway. It's dogs on top of that as well. I find myself at odds with a lot of colleagues I respect who are angry the ban has been repealed. I don't know if my concerns are coloured by my positive experiences in the industry, or biased by the types of people that like to talk to dog behaviour scientists, and if it matters. There were a lot of people in rescue delighted to see it coming to an end, while at the same time in denial about the sheer number of adoptable dogs that were probably not going to make it purely because there were going to be too many of them. I can't help feeling that everyone grabbed at the first deal offered and just talked themselves into it being the best for the dogs. There has to be better ways, though. I'm not sure if no ban, or a trial period is better in the long-term, but it is in the short-term IMO. I sincerely hope if they ever do decide to ban it after all, they will put a lot more thought into how they will do it. I see your point. Though while I'm happy to be corrected, you seem to be saying regardless of what happens dogs will die. So maybe the original ban with a lead in time was probably best for the industry dogs. Next time you can almost guarantee that the public outrage will be such that there will be a brutal fast shutdown - and while I hate to see dogs die, at least as you say the cycle stops - for good. And those so called 'good people' who turned a blind eye to such abject cruelty and misery will hopefully rehome their 'family' dogs - but somehow I doubt it. If they could turn a blind eye to such cruelty and misery then death of their dogs in response to a ban probably won't mean much either. And yes I hope I'm wrong. But years of watching and managing human behaviour suggests otherwise.

So are you saying that the short sharp version closed the organisations down completely or they went OS, or was it that the participants just had to change their culture, no compromises, so the industry could survive? The latter m-j usually - it usually involves rapid down-sizing and sophisticated management of change and people - and that so ain't going to happen here. Management by attrition usually takes a long time, and while it works in some situations I doubt it will work here given the public and political pressure. So yes - I have seen absolutely nothing here to suggest that genuine sustainainble change will happen so this industry will survive in a form that is acceptable to the general public. In fact this decision has probably ensured the slow 'death by a thousand cuts' for this industry, unless it happens again. And yes I'm certain it will all happen again and next time it will be a brutal shutdown. Look the truth is that the days of using animals for gambling and entertainment are severely numbered - its only a matter of time given its a toxic mix that brings out the worst in human beings. So this industry can evolve to shutdown under its own control or have it done to it eventually. They can take their pick which route they take - but they are going to end up in the same place. Bookmark it.

Agree juice - and its such bollocks to say just because you don't live in the bush or regionally you don't understand. What crap. Anyone who stood by and turned a blind eye to the 'bad apples' is just a culpable - if not more so. So its the whole industry that needs a complete overhaul - not just rooting out the bad apples - and that takes significant expertise and resources. But first it requires awareness that change must happen - and I can't see that here.

Farewell beautiful girl. Mac, Mac, Penny, and Daisy will welcome you with open arms and you'll have such good company forever. Isabel, I've so sorry this day has come. You were the bestest Mum to Jindi. and I love your beautiful words. Big hugs.

Yep SM - and I have separate bottle of Dermotic for each dog and wipe the nozzle carefully between each ear.

I'm very interested RP - those two recipes make intrinsic sense to me and I'll use it as a maintenance regime - don't want to go through this again.

Skip I have a old Westie girl with very itchy saliva stained brown feet. She was a chronic licker and chewer. Similar behaviours, avoiding the lawn and perimeter patrolling on the concrete. Tried everything under the sun to help after two vets tried stuff too, to no avail.Calendula tea is fantastic for temporary relief but I found the 'itchies' always came back. Finally, a locum vet appeared at my usual vet with an interest in skin (not a dermatologist) and took scrapings from her ears and all feet and nail beds and looked at it all under a microscope. Diagnosis was a very heavy chronic yeast infection (malassezia). Prescribed an intensive programme of itraconozole (very expensive but worth every cent), dermotic for her ears and daily malaseb foot baths (I'd do this in front of the telly each night). The itraconozole was prescribed as a loading dose of 7 straight days ( from memory) and then 'pulse therapy' of two consecutive doses a week which I gave her on the weekends. All of this almost killed me! At the three week mark, she was much better and at the six week mark the yeast was undetectable under the microscope. She is now on a maintenance regime of epiotic ear cleaner twice a week, cortavance spray on her feet and the tail end of one dose a week of the itraconozole. Yes it's been a helluva job to keep it up. But it's been worth it as her paw licking has virtually gone and she's so much more comfy. The vet told me the problem with chronic yeast infection is it gets into the nail beds and embeds in the nails themselves so it can be very hard to get rid of without an intensive regime. So moral of my story is get the correct diagnosis first. Get your vet to take feet scrapings and look at it carefully under the microscope. And go from there. You'll spend a fortune in money, time and energy guessing 'possible cures', particularly if the problem is a chronic one. Hope that helps your little one. Good luck with it and will be very interested in how you get on. ETA: I've also started her on Protexin powder (a great DOL suggestion) with her dinner at night which is a probiotic and hopefully helps normalise gut bacterial flora and help deal with the yeast systemically.