blackdog

My wife and I celebrate 31 years in our chosen breed this year and for the past 25 years we have been breeding. A quick check of my records reveals that we have only bred 12 litters in all that time. We breed for ourselves first and if there are some quality puppies available after we have made our selections these always go to caring families. Occassionally we may sell or transfer a youngster to another breeder but this is very rare indeed. Our involvement became more than just a hobby when we joined our State Breed Club in 1980 - after that the bug really began to bite. We I was a kid growing up in suburban Brisbane a "breeder" was held in the highest esteem. It didn't matter whether it was a dog breeder or a poultry breeder or a horse breeder - these people were like Gods in my young mind. They spoke slowly and with authority - they really knew their stuff and could be relied upon for sound advice. I live in hope that one day communitity attitudes may come full circle and experienced responsible breeders will once again be treated with the respect that they deserve. And I live in hope of one day finding a solution to the puppy farm industry "blight" that destroys public confidence in what responsible breeders are trying to achieve.

Hi Buddy 1 - I haven't read the whole thread but you may need to consider bottle feeding just to top up your babies. 9 is a fairly healthy number and sometimes first time bitches simply don't produce enough quality milk early enough to meet the needs of their new family. My wife and I have been breeding and exhibitting Labs for 31 years - if you need a hand please PM me - I am always more than happy to assist new breeders either via telephone or a quick call in if you live handy.

People on this forum, I would draw your attention what has been written in the above post. It is bold-ed below. remember that every purchaser of a pedigreed, registered puppy in Qld receives a questionnaire/feedback form from DQ about their experience with the breeder of their new puppy Do you believe this should happen. Surely if the transfer or registration if filed with Dogs Qld., then we as breeders have done the right thing. What more do you want. Is it legal to gather information on people like this. A bit of bad luck if the new owners do something wrong with the puppy (as has happened) and gets upset with the breeder and files a bad report. This smack's as Big Brother Is Watching. Also black dog where has myself or any other breeder said ABS is not warranted. I am all for it. But not in the form it is now. It is self accreditation and you pay a fee and hey preseto you are accredited. An Accredited Breeder Scheme should be something earned not payed for by yourself. Surely you must have been breeding for X amount of year's and produced outstanding dogs in your chosen breed. At least bred a few Champions. There I started the ball rolling on an idea for an Accredited Breeders Scheme. As it stands now any person can be accredited breeder as long you hold a prefix and have bred one litter. Dearest Oakway - I can recall information about the (what was then proposed) Breeder Accreditation scheme being published in the Qld Dog World on at least 2 occassions during 2010. Did you ever once contribute your thoughts and ideas to the proposed scheme when it was sought? Or did you (like many DQ members) simply go straight to the show schedule section and ignore the rest of the magazine designed to keep you and other members informed? Dogs Qld have no way of defending themselves against "snipers" like you I'm afraid - you sit protected behind your user name on forums like this and let fire with ill informed and inaccurate information which is then taken as gospel truth. You have been very vocal on this forum about what is wrong with the DQ BAS but nowhere can I find where you have offered some sort of alternative. You tell us you are a good breeder and that others who are accreditted may not be. What criteria do you use to judge your fellow member breeders - gut feel, jealousy, rumour and inuendo it would seem. And then you burr up at the thought of a puppy buyer being given the opportunity to provide feedback to DQ about their experience with a registered DQ breeder. That smacks of double standards - you tell us you are a skilled, experienced well regarded breeder but you are not prepared to accept the opiniona and feedback from the MOST important link in the chain - the puppy buyer. Sorry but I for one will place no credence whatsoever in your opinions in future.

Oakway - I thought that my contribution to this discussion would have been sufficient to convince you of the benefits of the scheme. Whilst the scheme is still new there is benefit to be had by allowing all DQ member breeders the opportunity of becoming accreditted. What it does right now is elicit a clear undertaking from all those applying for acceptance that they will abide by certain conditions. That comes at some degree of risk because if an accreditted breeder is then found to be operating outside of the conditions then they become very visible. Additionally - the scheme will evolve over time, newer, less experienced breeders will join whilst others may drop off. And during this evolution the scheme may well change where more stringent requirements are put in place. The need to "pay" as you so eloquently describe it - is $22.00 for a 3 year period - all that covers is the Administration costs. The REAL cost is the undertaking that applicants will abide by (and embrace) the objects and purposes of the scheme. I too agree with Steve - you need to be very careful when you cast allegations around recklessly. If you have absolute proof that fellow member breeders are doing the wrong thing, or are in breach of rules then "put it up". But if your opinions are driven just by gut feel or rumour then that is a flawed premise. At the very least your inference has so far been that some DQ accreditted breeders are less than moral in their breeding practices - but until you name names with hard evidence to back up your claims then your statements place EVERY DQ accreditted breeder under a cloud of suspicion. Could I therefore recommend that if you TRULY believe you are a breeder of such good standing (such that you are able to outperform all others within your breed in Queensland) then you SHOULD apply for accreditation. As I've suggested previously it will ultimately be the puppy buying public who will decide whether a breeder is worthy of accreditation.

I can absolutely guarantee all Dogs Qld members (and forum participants) that the DQ Breeder Accreditation scheme is very highly regarded by both State and Local Governments. It is seen by them as yet another example of Dogs Queensland taking the initiative in regards to the "unresolved" question of dog breeding. More importantly the DQ BA scheme is seen as another means of setting responsible Dogs Queensland member breeders apart for BYB and puppy farmers. The Breeder Accrediatation scheme is still in it's infancy so it will evolve over time. Ultimately it will be the puppy buyers who will drive this evolution - remember that every purchaser of a pedigreed, registered puppy in Qld receives a questionarre/feedback form from DQ about their experience with the breeder of their new puppy. So please don't underestimate the value of the recently introduced DQ BA scheme - embrace it as a means to an end - as an Accreditted DQ member breeder I certainly support the scheme.

When has he never NOT had a handle on it?

Dogs Queensland Rule 36 (4) (f) states: The application for registration is accompanied by a duly completed service certificate which must be signed at the time of stud by both parties. Should a stud agreement be made this should be signed by both parties at the same time and be forwarded to CCC(Q) office with litter registration form. Not sure if this rule (or similar) applies in other states but usually the requirement is pretty simple. 1. Take or send your in season bitch to the stud dog owner. 2. The bitch is serviced by the stud dog at the appropriate time. 3. You pay the stud fee upon collection of your bitch and the stud dog owner supplies you with a signed service certificate.

For all of our Dogs Queensland members currently resident in Moreton Bay Regional Council area. MBRC will close off breeder permit applications on Thursday 23rd December. If you haven't yet applied for a breeder permit please do so urgently. For members considering moving in to MBRC after the closing date. You can apply as a new resident with no time restrictions. If you have submitted an application more than 4 weeks ago please contact: Louise Laurens MBRC [email protected] or telephone on mobile 0438204359 Louise can confirm that your application is in the system and is being processed.

Dear Zenchel - I understand exactly what your concerns were/are. The issue had nothing at all to do with whether or not the tooth needed to be removed. It have everything to do with your vet keeping you reliably informed about your bitch. It's not rocket science really. Step 1 - determine whether the bitch is pregnant (you informed them that she might be). Step 2 - bitch is confirmed pregnant then ring the owner. Step 3 - discuss options, risks, urgency etc. Step 4 - owner makes a well informed decision anf gives permission to proceed. I use two highly regarded vets - one for day to day stuff, jabs, hip and elbow xrays etc. The other is a specialist reproductive vet who I use for chilled / frozen AI, shipping, prog tests etc. If at ant time I can't get to see the practice manager (my usual Vet) I will wait til I can. There is nothing worse than having to deal with a locum or junior who knows nothing about me or my dogs history. If it is urgent (like your tooth issue) and I can't get my usual vet immediately then the rule is always: DO NOTHING UNTIL YOU RING ME AND SPEAK TO ME PERSONALLY. I do hope that all goes well with your babies - fingers crossed for yet another very successful litter.

That is also a good point. There is no law in Queensland which requires a suspected Pit Bull (or Pit Bull type) to be immediately euthanaised. Those suspect breeds may be kept under permit - so long as certain criteria are met. I think you may find that the suspect breed types that are humanely euthanaised by AWL / Shelters are done so for one reason. The dogs have been seized (often on another matter - wandering / menace) and the owners either fail to claim them or can not / will not comply with the permit conditions.

They were, but that was some time ago. And yes, over the last week or so they have closed them down. I haven't seen any updates on websites, but have been dealing with the fall out all week It depends on what you are looking for in terms of a "similar" service. Do you mean transport, storage or collection? Most of the main repro vets in Vic do collection and storage. I'd recommend Cryogenes in Vic for transport. But if you are looking for someone else who will do the whole "collecting at a show" thing - I'm afraid I don't know of any other company who does that. Same here in Brisbane - Frozen Puppies (Ron Newland esq) has closed it's doors. Received a letter yesterday from GT Pets (yet another trading name for GTG) telling me that THEY had decided to relocate the frozen semen which I had stored with them to a Greencross Vet practice at Redbank. Rang the practice and the staff knew nothing about it - I would have to speak to the practice manager. Now doesn't that fill one with confidence - just dandy. So when did it become OK to tell the customer AFTER the event. No mention in the letter of transfer fees or new storage cost arrangements. Word on the streets is that there are many examples too of frozen breeding units going missing or being sent to the wrong clients. And huge miscalculations of invoice costs regarding storage / import fees etc. I can certainly recommend Dr Annette Page who does collect and store locally in Brisbane.

I believe that Alan Candlish has retired from the position with Dogs NSW. Dogs Qld employed a full time Government & Agency Liaison officer (Mark Sheppard) in December 2009. Every Local Council has different rules and regs in respect of dogs. Almost all use a standard "as of right" template which usually allows 2 dogs, registered, microchipped. You have moved into an area where your Local Council simply uses the standard template. The best way to check the requirements is to get hold of a copy of the Subordinate Local Law which applies to Animal Keeping. Once you familiarise yourself with the Local Law then try to meet with the head of your Local Council Animal Management team. DON"T go to the Mayor or your local Councillor - do the initial legwork yourself. And please don't rely on the word of a staff member at the "front desk" - almost always you will receive incorrect info. Take your rejected application with you and then discuss (face to face) the possibility of applying for a harbouring license. Many Councils offer this on compassionate grounds and it would certainly apply to the eldest of your dogs. If approved it would allow you to keep an extra dog over and above the "as of right" minimum. Good luck - I hope it works out for you.

Local Government Minister Desley Boyle has today (31/7/10) announced she will amend the Animal Management (Cats and Dogs) Act 2008 to clarify once and for all that American Staffordshire terriers are not classified as “restricted dogs”. This follows a Supreme Court case in April, Gold Coast City Council v. Chivers, which ruled the Amstaff involved was the same as a restricted American Pit bull. Ms Boyle said pit bulls have been prohibited by many Queensland Councils under their local laws, listed as “restricted” under State legislation and banned from importation by the Commonwealth. There are an estimated 4,000 Amstaffs in Queensland, some 230 on the Gold Coast. “The amendment will state categorically that for the purposes of the Act, Amstaffs will not be considered the same as the restricted pit bulls,” Ms Boyle said. “This will give Amstaff owners especially on the Gold Coast certainty about their rights and obligations yet it will give Queenslanders peace of mind that the legislation’s tough penalties remain for irresponsible pet owners whose dogs cause fear or harm,” she said. “While it was never the State’s intention for the Act to classify Amstaffs as restricted dogs, the recent court case has meant the amendment is now necessary.” It is generally accepted among experts that Amstaffs and pit bulls descended from Staffordshire bull terrier-type dogs however the restricted pit bulls were bred specifically as fighting animals. Amstaffs on the other hand were bred almost exclusively as show and companion dogs, widely recognised as trainable and family-friendly pets. Amstaffs are even used as therapy dogs including in hospitals. Well-known Brisbane Amstaff Nudie, owned by Mrs Melissa Greenall, visits aged-care facilities, special care and children’s wards. “Importantly the proposed amendment to the legislation will not compromise community safety as owners of all dogs, including Amstaff owners, will be held accountable for the behaviour of their charges,” said the Minister. “The same rules apply to all dog owners and you will feel the full weight of the law if your dog behaves badly or causes harm.” If a dog bites someone, Ms Boyle said a fine of up to $30,000 can apply under the Act and the dog can be seized by Council and declared as dangerous. “If a dog bails someone up on the street, a fine of $2,000 can apply and Council can declare the animal as menacing,” she said. “Special provisions apply to animals declared as dangerous or menacing, such as fencing, muzzling and kennel requirements. “I take this opportunity to thank Dogs Queensland President Barry Vickers in particularly and his team who have worked with departmental officers in sorting out the confusions flowing from the recent court decision and this amendment will put the matter to rest.”

Dear Labkisses - very sorry to hear of the difficulties you have encountered with your puppy. My experience of breeding and exhibiting Labrador Retrievers spans 30+ years. During that time I have bred two puppies (males) that have been diagnosed with mild entropian. In both cases the veterinary strategy was as follows: Retain the puppy until 10-12 weeks of age soas to allow the head to "grow". That possibly may alter the placement of the eye structure and hence the lower eyelid and eyelashes. Where no improvement occurs surgery to adjust the lower eye lid was performed. This involves removing a small moon shaped piece of skin from below the lower eyelid and then stitching the incision. Which effectively draws the lower eyelid down away from the eye and rolls the eyelashes outwards. Of the two puppies we bred one simply grew out of it - the second required surgery. Both were held back until 16 weeks of age and then sold as pets only - not to be bred from. Those puppies would be 10 and 15 years old now and both led perfectly normal happy lives. But I would suggest that there is no way this puppy of yours will be ready to send to new owners in a matter of weeks. Ah the joys of breeding - all part of the learning curve unfortunately. Best of luck for a successful outcome.

Hello all - it's been ages since I last contributed to this forum. But a fellow DOLer convinced me to drag myself away from FB long enough to follow this thread. It seems to me that nobody will win this current debate regarding Chocolate labs - and so be it. The one ingredient that has been missed in the discussion thus far is type - breed type. And breed type means different things to different people. To quote MRW - "A labrador should look like a Labrador and nothing else". If a breeder/exhibitor can't find or plan a litter that at least retains THEIR breed type before all else then why do it? It's like shoving a Picasso together with a Van Gough and expecting to get anything better than a Grade 3 crayon drawing. So it matters little (if at all) whether "big bucks" have been spent importing stock from every corner of the globe. It is certainly no guarantee of success - if the dogs and bitches don't click what's been the point? And the only ones who get fooled by all of the hype are the unsuspecting puppy buyers (or novice breeders). They forget (or conveniently overlook the fact) that at the end of the day the real value of a dog or bitch is quality of it's get. I would breed a chocolate litter in an instant if I felt that I could retain my kennel "type". And when I do breed a litter (the last was 18 months ago) I am not just considering a single dog or bitch (the parents). I am assessing the strengths and weaknesses of an entire family of Labradors. I do hope that Sandgrubber is correct when she suggests that over the next 10 years the quality of Choc labs will improve significantly. We should all hope for the same thing - the same as we all hope the quality of our Blacks and Yellows is maintained and improves. See you all in Sydney for the 2020 Labrador National. It will be the place to judge whether Sandgrubber has been correct with her crystal ball gazing.

I have just read a copy of the judges decision and the GCCC is not to blame for this outcome. Tango was positively identified some years ago by GCCC as an Amstaff and the GCCC offered to release the dog to its owners. Where things all went pearshaped is that Tango's owners endeavoured to go one step further. They appear to have sought a ruling that would favour the APBT as well. The defendant (Chivers) produced evidence which suggested that Amstaffs and APBT were the same brred of dog. All that the GCCC legal team did was to ask the judge (based on Chivers own evidence) whether an Amstaff and an APBT were the same breed of dog. The judge's decision (based on the evidence of the case before him) was that "yes" they are the same breed.

Dear Mrs TS - I have a 10yo Lab girl here and she still gets called puppy when she is bounding about being adorably silly. From a "show ring" perspective puppies are age classed as follows: - baby puppy 3-6 months - minor puppy 6-9 months - puppy class 6-12 months Additionally, most Local Governments require dogs to be registered once they reach 12 weeks of age. Up until that time they are regarded as a puppy.

Never bred one Mercedes but have seen 3 litters of "Black and Tans" in my 30 years experience. They are a recognised mismark in the same way as Liver Pointed yellows are incorrect. But recognised mismarks in Labradors are not new. Many of us have experienced the white spot on the chest of blacks (permissable in the breed standard but not desirable). And occassionally that small white spot can stretch from elbow to elbow - yikes. Or worse still from the point of the sternum right down under the belly. I have a book written many many years ago by Mary Roslin-Williams that has a photo of two "hailstone" labradors. Blue black coats covered in white spots - extrordinary really - quite outstanding type but incorrect coat colour. And here's one that I will admit to - I once bred a simply stunning yellow dog that had (wait for it) - a black patch on one ear!! And bred from the very best bloodlines in the country too BTW - he went to a magnificent home on limited register. The family had a young son with spina bifida and they trained the dog as an assistance companion for the lad. A black mismark on his ear didn't stop that dog fulfilling his destiny. But I certainly didn't jack up the price and sell the dog as a "rarity" or a "curiosity" either.

Professor Jacqui Rand (Uni of QLD) in her 2008 report to the Qld Govt mentioned the incidence of incontenence in older female dogs that had been desexed early. The following link takes you to a copy of her report - specific reference to your problem can be found on page 17. http://www.uq.edu.au/ccah/docs/15309finalreport.pdf

Look around on some of the breeders websites, I am sure you will find labs that suit you. Are you wanting to show your dog or do some obedience or retrieving with it? Dear Aussielover - the simple answer to your question is : "The breed standard is the breed standard". The very same breeed standard is used in the UK as it is here - what you are describing is a difference in "breed type". Every breeder/exhibitor interprets that breed standard differently - they place particular emphasis on different things. The result can be a certain "type" which may become synonymous with an individual kennel or group of like minded breeders. If your preference is for a Lab that is more "rangey" then thats what you should go looking for. But that doesn't mean that the same dog will fall within the Internationally accepted breed standard. And just because you may have seen these types in the UK doesn't mean that they are actually correct. Australia is currently regarded as having some of the very best Labradors Retrievers anywhere in the World. Good luck with your search.

Ah yes Mercedes - the great Geographic debate. In theory our "system" of awarding show titles in this Country was designed to be equitable. In remote/rural areas where often times there are less dogs entered fewer challenge points are on offer The math : beat fewer dogs = take longer to attain title. The flip side is (again in theory) big city breed entries. The math : beat more dogs = attain title quicker (but more difficult to achieve). Irrespective of where we live there will always be the weekly ups and downs of All Breeds dog shows. But where it really counts is Specialty Shows and Breed Nationals. How many times have we seen Lab exhibitors NOT supporting their State Breed Club Specialty Champ Show. Instead they creep off to the bush or some small show over the border to plunder some extra points. Same goes with Nationals - I've lost count of the number of times I've heard the comment - "Oh I'm not entering because I won't win". These people have missed the point completely - it's not about winning (although to do so is a great thrill). What it should be about is everybody taking the opportunity of seeing first hand all of the dogs many of us only ever read about on DOL. And while I'm on the subject of DOL - I heard recently a very disturbing report that catalogue numbers may be being "stacked". Now for the unitiated the DOL Best of Breed pointscore system is based on the number of Labs actually entered in the show catalogue. If 20 labs are entered (irrespective of absentees) then the Best of Breed winner achieves and can claim 20 points. But rumour has it that big numbers of Labs are being entered and that same exhibitor only turns up with one (maybe two) Labs on the day. There may be only 3 labs in total actually exhibitted but the full catalogue entry still counts. Now I repeat - this is only hearsay but if true the whole system of the DOL Best of Breed pointscore is flawed.

Excluded no - but pedigree highly researched (as we do whatever the concern). If I were to use an untested high quality prepotent stud, I would test puppies before placement. If any carriers and the dam is clear/normal, obviously the stud is at least a carrier. If all pups carriers I would assume the high probability stud is affected. May I throw a question back, do you feel bench quality has deteriorated since the PRA test? Interesting question - I don't look at something called "bench quality" BTW. I look at something called breed type and in this regard the short answer to your question is no - IMHO. But there would be lots of other reasons for Variation (not deterioration) in type which does seem to be a more prevalent thing. What does appear to be happening is the increased incidence of frozen AI litters and these outcross sires are having an effect on type. But that would be as expected - nobody should expect any outcross to immediately click with every bitch. But in response to the question I think you were asking which I read as: "Is breed type suffering because breeders are insisting on always using PRA clear sires and dams". Again my short answer is no - there are significant numbers of clear sires available for this not to be an issue. Sorry for the incorrect wording. No matter, I hope. When looking into EIC (some referred to it as heat stroke or a form of epilepsy), years ago, I thought Australia was relatively safe (but had heard otherwise). While discussing with a canine geneticist, a very nice man, he replied "you have an island mentality". At the time I was looking at working pedigrees, and was floored when EIC was discovered in show lines, in America, Canada and UK, where the breed split DECADES ago. When we look at large labrador populations in other countries, where they have been breeding around diseases since the development of DNA tests, PRA, CNM, RD and EIC, I cannot help noticing other lesser problematic diseases, CCL tears being one example becoming more common. BTW, a test for CCL disease is expected sooner than later. October 2010. I like DNA tests. We live in exciting times. No drama re your wording at all Lablover. I too "like" DNA testing but only for defects that are widely recognised in our breed. Beware the trap that many of our American comrades seem to have fallen into. In their resolve to be seen as "responsible" breeders they now seem to test for everything. But IMO it is fair to suggest that type has, in many instances, been lost. A similar issue seems to be manifesting itself in Sweden - on paper at least the soundest labs in the world but...... In the immortal words of "Black Mary" (Mary Roslin-Williams : Mansergh Labradors UK): A Labrador Should Look Like A Labrador And Nothing Else.

Excluded no - but pedigree highly researched (as we do whatever the concern). If I were to use an untested high quality prepotent stud, I would test puppies before placement. If any carriers and the dam is clear/normal, obviously the stud is at least a carrier. If all pups carriers I would assume the high probability stud is affected. May I throw a question back, do you feel bench quality has deteriorated since the PRA test? Interesting question - I don't look at something called "bench quality" BTW. I look at something called breed type and in this regard the short answer to your question is no - IMHO. But there would be lots of other reasons for Variation (not deterioration) in type which does seem to be a more prevalent thing. What does appear to be happening is the increased incidence of frozen AI litters and these outcross sires are having an effect on type. But that would be as expected - nobody should expect any outcross to immediately click with every bitch. But in response to the question I think you were asking which I read as: "Is breed type suffering because breeders are insisting on always using PRA clear sires and dams". Again my short answer is no - there are significant numbers of clear sires available for this not to be an issue.

Hi there Wuppywoman - I still have very real concerns with the efficacy of the EIC test. If certain labs are tested as being "affected" and yet do not show signs of collapse then what is it exactly that we are testing for? By all means go ahead and have your 8 tested - but what will your strategy be if all come back as affected or carriers? And in reference to your concern about EIC becoming a compulsory test in future - is that really foreseeable? We still don't have recommended upper level hip & elbow limits, nor is DNA eye testing for PRA a prerequisite for breeding. I would suggest that EIC needs to take a number and wait at the end of a very long line. And in reply to Lablover and her recommendation that breeders ask whether stud dogs have been EIC tested? Nice sentiment but what if they're not tested - which dogs are you going to use? Would a top class stud dog that has not been EIC tested be automatically excluded from a breeding programme? Personally I would have thought that there are still far bigger issues prevalent in our breed that need fixing. Maybe everybody's energy would be better expended on fixing those things rather than running about looking for "new" things to worry about. regards to all.

Hi there Pesh - what an interesting question. I am assuming that this Lab is pure bred, pedigreed and registered so we won't consider any "cross-bred theories). It is difficult to picture exactly what you are describing without a photo. But black labs do vary in the "intensity" of their coat colour. They are of course all black coated but the "brightness" of the black differs. Quite often the shiny coated blacks carry a distinct lack of undercaot - a fault in the labrador Breed standard. The duller blue/black coats are most times the very best. Fantastic greyish (almost like lambswool) undercoat but can be a bit dull outwardly to look at. Black Labs are unique in a number of ways. For instance have you ever noticed that Black labs smell different to yellows when being hydrobathed. Now be careful BD next thing you will be telling us that chocs have a different temperament and we've all heard that before with Seriously - blacks do smell very different to yellows when being hydrobathed. Try it for yourselves - just use plain warm water (no shampoos, dip etc) and smell the different odour they're coats give off. As for Chocolates - if you had your way Mercedes you would have us believe that Chocolates smell like - er - chocolate.