BJean

just looked on SADS' website and if I was looking for a puppy, I'd want more reliabilty when it came to breed identification - and yes I get it that they're a rescue and do their best but I really don't think a family with your dog owning history (I'm thinking of your middle daughter who had a chunk of her middle lip bitten) should play 'pick the breed' (and therefore characteristics etc) when choosing a suitable puppy for their family. as an example, (for their medium to large sized dogs, and I know you're looking at puppies) http://www.saveadog.org.au/dogs/dogs_medlarge.asp Leo is not a Maremma x and Ella is not a Lab x. No lab in Ella. Ella is an Anatolian x maremma. If you were to adopt her as a puppy thinking she was a labx big variance in behavioural and temperament expectations. If you like pugs then try pug rescue???

huh? small puppy = small breed/mix that is a puppy. That you wont really know what the mixed breeds in the puppy are - therefore there wil be more variability wrt mature size, temperament, behavioural traits etc.

If you want more predicability wrt physical attributes, size, temperament, energy level, care requirements etc you would have more likelihood of 'success' if you decided on a breed based on your family's needs and then seek that puppy from a reputable registered breeder. 'small Puppy' is not sufficient criteria for a family. :D

that was quick.

No what makes a dog the best at what it does, is not only the combination of the physical and mental - but how the physical and mental are pefectly attuned to the total dog. ie The Maremma and Central Asian are both excellent stock guardians, but they each go about their guardian roles differently because of their unique mental and physical attributes. The maremma prefers to outhink and out manouvre, barking to raise alarm and to warn off threats, only using physical confrontation as an absolute last resort. the central asian is not as lithe as the maremma, it is not going to run back and forth from the fence line to issue warnings. when it gets up it goes straight to physical confrontation. it is not built to run the yards the maremma does, it hasn't got the subtle strategy that the maremma knows. The central asian's upper hand is in physical force and ingrained physical and mental resilience. A maremma x central asian will never have the full strength and physical capability of a pure central asian because the maremma is not built to take and dispense physical assault the way a central asian is similarly the central asian doesn't know the maremma concept of subtle strategy. So a maremma x central asian will not last long as a stock guard and will always be an inferior dog to its pure bred counterparts, as a dog cannot address 'threats' with a maremma or central asian game plan if it hasn't got the physical and mental material to carry out that game plan - a maremma strategy to deal with threatening feral dogs would be to stay close to its flock and shepherd and protect whereas a central asian would ride out with guns blazing - each breeds methodolgy is a success only bcz of their respective physical and mental characteristics.

I would. There's no mutt that is half as good as my pedigree dogs. No mutt can guard better. No mutt can defend better. No mutt is as sound pound for pound. No mutt has better physical resilience. No modern mutt can survive and thrive in environmental extremes like my pedigree dogs can. No mutt can do what my pedigree dogs do. Not a chance. And I bet every dedicated breeder/owner can say the same for their pedigree dogs and their specialisation.

I understand what you're saying....even tho' people might jump to the conclusion it's elitism. No, you're being practical. Many of the pure breeds have distinct behavioral traits....as well as conformation...that make a breed unique. All of which should be preserved. And only owners up-to-speed with what they are....& who are prepared to work along with them....should own that breed. This is pointed out re tibetan spaniels on the international Tibbies Net site, where the best of the international breeders gather. Here's the page where they ask people to consider, this may not be the breed for them: http://www.tibbies.net/right_breed.html It is I don't see anything wrong with it. Well bred pedigreed dogs from dediccted breeders ARE better than mongrels and owners of pedigreeds (word? ) should be proud to own the dogs they do. Everyone appreciates a well bred animal, horse owners walk their stock with pride, a fit healthy thoroughbred, beautiful Arabian, impressive Percheron, striking Appaloosa - they all enthrall, inspire and capture the imagination - same with an awesome Newfoundland, elegant Borzoi, spritely hound, devoted Tibbie, handsome Labrador, or pretty Yorkshire ... Cross breeds are no more than a disgruntled dog owner's effort to achieve the attributes of an ideal dog that they first became aware of through a pedigreed pure bred. Yes problems can come from status symbols, but i think more problems come when we don't have the pride to stand up and away, on our own merit NB: to borrow an analogy from greytmate - we've been marketing pedigree dogs like fords when most of the populace dont want anything more than a datsun. So let them have the datsuns, ford and holden hybrids no one remembers those cars anyway no more markdowns to fit in with common perception - bentleys, mercedes, porsche, lamborghini (lol which dog are you )

I'm going to go with Brasco, wish it was in April instead though as then I would bring a cropped/docked import along also, to educate about not to be so aghast. But I guess that will have to wait until the next expo now

Does it mean the parents' papers come with the puppies? as an aside, the RSPCA and other rescue groups want to put (and some already are) their puppies/dogs in pet shops for exposure so I guess what's the difference?

Putting restrictions on who can buy would not work in isolation, it is part of a sales process. What they have done is build up their brand 'Weimeraner' and make it as good quality as they can. They market that, and the restrictions don't come in until after the buyer has decided what they want and the salesperson qualifies the sale (or more accurately, the breeder enforces restrictions). No different from selling Mercedes. The manufactureres and marketers make people desire it. But not everyone that wants one will qualify to buy. With a car the only qualifier is price, with a Weimeraner it is price and the restrictions. They don't lose sales, the restrictions make the product even more exclusive and attractive. They are not for Joe Average, but neither are most of the other finer things in life, and the Weimeraner buyers know that. In Australia, we don't see many dogs being sold that way. In our business we have made a real effort to build up our brand, and that makes it easier for us to sell more dogs, and people want our dogs even though we have restrictions too. But if you have the restrictions without the marketing and the quality control, it isn't going to work. I think all pedigreed breeds should be sold or recognised almost like a brand. let the masses have oodles, those who want something special and a cut above the rest will get the brand/breed of their choosing. prestige cars can't be had by all and so can't the best dogs. it would not hurt if pedigreed dogs became a status symbol. Let the medicore have their mongrels and modpets, can't be casting pearls amongst swine anyway

The GSD is standing up on an incline, its back legs are longer that its front legs, the GSD in this picture would not / does not have a straight back.

If I have a puppy that suckles strongly but doesn't seem to thrive in the first few days, I administer anitbiotic (amoxicillin or calvulox) to prevent any infection becoming dire and more noticeable and supplement with goats milk. If there is nothing physically wrong with the puppy then he/she should begin to put weight on. Sometimes no weight gain can be a sign of early illness.

It ultimately comes down to those who choose to breed and what/why they breed for. So many times I have had Joe Public ask me if I would ever breed to dilute the temp of CAO or whether it would be a good idea if they did and I go nope, no way. Buy a newfoundland, get something else. You want a breed's look but not what it is, sorry go look elsewhere. I'm proud of the dogs' heritage and what they are capable of, and in truth it is what draws people to the breed (actually any breed) in the first instance - All breeds have their foundation forebear's stories of legend, often based around some heroic romantic miracle or impressive physical feat. imo my breeds are special because they are not mere 'legend encapsulated' - they really can do what they were/are bred to do and they look like now, what they did 'back then'.

ahh filas such beauitful dogs, must be a way I can get one ... no seriously, although it sounds horrid 'hunting runaway slaves', the fila's job was to hold them unharmed ... their guard and protection work is still applicable though

no? Your team leader doesn't seem to think so: "We think the best bet is to try and get or devise a test to use to test adult dogs before we breed from them. "If we can test the parents, it could lead to a certificate of temperament that will show this dog has been friendly, safe with kids and easy to manage.

No I have not been labelling it as your research, I have been labelling it as what your research is for. For DOL's benefit here is a sample of Pauline Bennett (head of the Monash study) - Monash University psychologists believe it is personality - not breeding - that makes a dog a perfect match with its master. Psychologist and dog breeder Pauline Bennett heads a team working to find a way that people can identify the best pooch to match their lifestyles. ... Dr Bennett said people should worry less about a dog's breed and more about their overall behaviour background to decide if one is right for them. "People differ in what they want their dog to look like and what character traits they hope it has but, universally, they almost all agreed they wanted a dog that is safe with children, is easy to manage, and is friendly," she said. "We think that's what we should be breeding, those character traits, as opposed to specific dog breeds." Dr Bennett said there was little point doing temperament tests on pups because they had yet to form a personality. "We think the best bet is to try and get or devise a test to use to test adult dogs before we breed from them. "If we can test the parents, it could lead to a certificate of temperament that will show this dog has been friendly, safe with kids and easy to manage.

Tammie: IDENTIFYING IDEAL COMPANION DOGS FOR AUSTRALIA However, in the modern world, most dogs rarely, if ever, undertake the role that their ancestors were selectively bred to perform. More often than not, dogs are obtained purely as companion animals and some canine behaviours that were once valued and selected for, such as barking and digging, are now considered objectionable and unwanted by dogs owners. Changing lifestyles mean that the traditional dog/owner relationship has altered. Whereas many working dogs traditionally stayed with their owner during the whole day, today these same dogs are often left alone, confined in a backyard or house, where they are expected to be calm, quiet and well behaved. <a href="http://mpa.monash.edu.au/compass-archives/...tsacademic.html" target="_blank">http://mpa.monash.edu.au/compass-archives/...tsacademic.html</a> As a dog breeder etc I'm sure you would be aware, that some of the functional traits selected for back in ye olde required behavioural charactertics in order for the dog to complete its task properly? You do realise of course that to be a fearless guard, or dependable hunter that a steadfast nervous system is paramount - which produces dogs which are easy going, relaxed, sociable and good with children???

Rottweilers aren't my breed so I don't know how those involved with the Rottweiler feel about the 'success' of the Duicth Kennel Club. Is it indeed a success? How are Dutch Rottweilers rated by Rottweiler breeders/owners? http://mpa.monash.edu.au/compass-archives/...tsacademic.html The focus of my PhD is to develop an objective behaviour assessment which can measure ‘amicability’ of adult companion dogs. While a number of dog behaviour assessments already exist, most are aimed at identifying suitable working dogs with few involving pet dogs. Furthermore, many assessments have not been developed correctly using a systematic scientific approach and often rely on subjective ratings of behaviour. By developing an accurate and reliable behavioural assessment I hope that, in the future, it could be utilised by dog breeders and other dog related organisations to not only help breed pet dogs better suited to the modern world, but also help identify the suitability of individual dogs as pets. For me, when you start talking about identifying suitability you are talking about prescribing a set of views on what should be the ideal pet dog for the modern world. Identifying amicability isn't rocket science??? For me its kind of a no brainer, but then I am not trying to engender a new world order on companion pet dog ownership. there was a consistent preference for behavioural characteristics associated with what might be called 'amicable' dogs; i.e. those which are easy going, friendly, non-aggressive, relaxed and sociable. Evidence suggests that canine behaviours are controlled, at least in part, by genetic components. Therefore, it can be presumed that individual dogs behave differently because they differ in their underlying personality or temperament. What canine-specific traits have you come up which determine 'friendliness'? what behavioural components produce 'easy going'? You can't measure friendliness itself as it is an end product of genetic components + human rearing. If the benefits of dog ownership are to be maintained and the welfare of dogs protected, it is critically important that dogs and humans live together harmoniously. With various factors, such as urban consolidation, busier lifestyles and government legislation restricting pet ownership, it is necessary to determine whether the dogs available today are best suited, or ‘ideal’ to perform their modern roles as companions and family members. This is a difficult question to answer because, although many dog breeders and trainers strive to produce perfect companion dogs, there are no standards against which dogs can be judged for their suitability as pets. In the absence of scientific evidence regarding owner requirements, breeders and trainers are left dependent on intuition, personal experience, and breed standards that relate to historic functionality or to other criteria that are not necessarily relevant to today's urban dog owner. So what constitutes an ideal dog in the modern world? In order to find out whether there are common canine characteristics that a majority of Australians agreed upon, a survey was developed and data was collected from 877 participants. A number of important canine physical and behavioural characteristics were identified. A dog that is medium sized, short haired, de-sexed, safe with children, housetrained, friendly, obedient, healthy, affectionate and easy to manage rated as 'extremely important' by a large number of participants. Yes everyone appreciates a well behaved, well reared dog. but the biggest constituent of all ideal dogs in modern society, is its human upbringing. without the human component spent training, conditioing, rearing no dog, not even a modpet, can grow to be a ideal pet in the modern world.

It's also a good measure of the understanding of pedigree dog behaviour and its breeding by the welfare scientists; I'd say the rating is about 4 out of 10. I say this as a professional graduate and new participant in veterinary science education . . . who also happens to breed dogs. perhaps because it's about as useful as breeding for the broadstick of 'niceness'?

And for the third time, will individual breed characterisitcs be taken into account when measuring "amicability"? To use the example for the third time, I would guess an Afghan will respond differently to, say, a Labrador. Will this make one less "suitable for living in Australian society" than the other? I wouldn't think so. They are conducting a survey to look at what type of dogs are amicable, what produces them some kind of test so they can come up with a blueprint to build their modpet

oh that's right my brain doesn't work As stated the candidate is out to Improve canine welfare by characterising the perfect pet dog for Australia We recently applied to the Australian Research Council for funding to conduct a large scale study to identify canine genes underlying prosocial and antisocial behaviours. Their words, not mine. Because pet dogs live with pesky private citizens who vary in their capacity and willingness to do all and believe and be what the welare socio scientists prescribe they have nutted out another approach ... If the unevolved and unenlightened want to own pets and use animals lets sanction a modern companion breed of dog something like a stepford wife but a stepford canine which will minimise suffering to the dogs and be less offending to enlightened sensibilities.

What is meant by "the available environment" ? Modern society. Companion animals suffer as possessions of the human community, so to reduce that suffering it has been determined that a dog more suited to living as a modern companion would be more ethical: Companion dogs face unique welfare challenges, mostly because they live embedded within the human community, in a private sector not readily amenable to the enforcement of welfare standards. For this reason the best way to improve dog welfare is an indirect one, focusing on understanding and improving the relationships between individual humans and their canine companions. This requires a long term, multidisciplinary research program and it also requires community involvement, flexibility and an eye to the future, when small dogs and cats are expected to become more popular and where people are expected to live more transitory lifestyles in even higher density developments. Changes in human living conditions have enormous impacts on those animal species that live most closely with us, so the welfare of these animals can only be understood and promoted within a specific cultural and social context. ... centuries of selective breeding has resulted in the development of hundreds of dog breeds across the world, characterised by incredible diversity in both morphology and behaviour. Because canine behavioural traits are highly heritable we can, at least in theory, genetically ‘fix’ desirable characteristics in dog breeds, reproducing these reliably in subsequent generations. Just as we’ve previously produced dogs able to herd sheep or pull sleds, so we should be able to breed dogs perfectly suited to their role as companions. it is all part of Improving canine welfare by characterising the perfect pet dog for Australia

And that's exactly the problem with some research. You read the papers, and they make some sense - until you apply some common sense, and your dog knowledge, and then you shake your head in disbelief. I have come to the conclusion - with you apparently - that they begin with a result and make the study fit the results. And then they can hit the headlines. They make no secret of it, it's all part of their 'multidisciplinary approach': In other domestic animal sectors, two broad strategies have been used to address animal welfare issues. The first involves changing human caregiver attitudes and behaviours through education, incentives and legislation.The second involves using science to selectively produce animals better suited to the available environment. In most Australian states pet owner education programs are well established. Legislation to enforce responsible ownership practices has also been forthcoming. In the remainder of this presentation the focus will be on the second strategy.

Proof that this student is anti BSL? And no one's going to beat you up if you want to use your dog in the study. I don't think there will be any problem getting the 200 dogs anyhow, Ahhhh yes I do know that our government has been rather pigheaded with ignoring evidence in favour of going with media hype in enacting the BSL laws in the first place. & in continuing to keep them there... I just don't believe that's a reason to give up trying to produce more evidence. I don't believe one study could possibly fix the entire situation, but I do believe all evidence than can be produced against BSL is another small weapon, another small step in the right direction, another step closer to getting awareness out of how off-base BSL really is. Look, I'm not disagreeing with the concerns everyone has here - I agree with them. I just think that ignoring the study won't help; whereas providing dogs whose behaviour will NOT back up BSL claims has a teeny tiny chance of helping - at least more of a chance of influencing the study than doing nothing at all x This study is about producing companion dogs for society. A PB still looks like a PB and that is what BSL is about.

How do you perceive that it is more 'accurate' and 'superior' when what underlies 'prosocial' and 'antisocial' behaviours is the human component? We recently applied to the Australian Research Council for funding to conduct a large scale study to identify canine genes underlying prosocial and antisocial behaviours. One of our long term goals is to introduce a scheme whereby dog breeders can elect to have their dogs independently evaluated prior to using them for breeding purposes. Good results on the assessment could be used to promote the puppies as suitable companion dogs in much the same way that things like hip scores and show ring results are currently used, with the important caveat that a behavioural assessment scheme could be implemented for both purebred and crossbred dogs, and by those who elect to breed for the companion dog market rather than for the show ring. Developing alternative sources of animals for this market may significantly improve dog welfare over the longer term.