poodlefan

CW: Say "no". Its plain that the Shih Tzu doesn't want to "make friends". Tell the neighbour that her dog is clearly not happy in the company of other dogs and that its up to the owner, not her, to get help to deal with it. If the dog ends up biting another dog, it will be the neighbour that's liable if the dog is in her charge. And tell her that taking it down the dog park is a really really bad idea - that may be in her thoughtss.

If it has been abandoned, then it probably need to go to the pound or the RSPCA UNLESS you can get them to sign the dog over to ypu. Without a period of impoundment, they will still be the legal owners.

Annuka: Using crates, this is still possible.

Maybe someone's setting up a home based business and saw this as a cheap option to do it.

If you are old enough to buy a pup from a pet shop, you're old enough to be part of analysing the issue.

Only just saw this one. *puts hand up*

So the pup is being trained though? In something?

Clyde: I didn't buy the owner's explanation that the snail bait was spread (unknown to the owner) on the back lawn for one minute. That dog got at a box of it for sure. It was patently obvious when it vomitted pure snail bait - no grass, nothing. I'd say it got the box and dragged it onto the back lawn.

I'd not be allowing her close enough to either animal to trigger what is clearly pretty full on prey drive. What training have you actually done with her? Did you train sit, drop, recall etc? This kind of drive unfocussed and untrained will probably escalate. Sounds like far too much dog for a non-working, non-sports home to me

Not having to pay any RSPCA court costs is a real victory. Getting those dogs out of the RSPCA's clutches was too - it will keep any costs repayments down significantly. Well done to all involved in assisting Judy through this.

Hanna Gibbs: They can be. Someone I know lost two to a brown snake.

Linky Lucky there were no sharks about Edited to add more from the Portside Messenger

Maybe others would, but I wouldn't like this. I pay rates just like many others. I also pay Council Dog Registration fees, just like many others. And I don't think "large dog owners" should be discriminated against. I think we pay enough for everything that we do without knowing that even going for a lovely walk and run with your dog is going to cost too - and to have to think to remember your card .... and to have to know to keep an eye on time limits for being allowed to run your dog. Sorry, but that's like bringing in more and more laws but in the guise of restrictions and levies. Besides which, who would police these? Not to mention the cost involved in fencing and monitoring people's cards at gates. Even if automated, that would cost a fortune and then there will be break-downs and maintenance. I want the freedom to enjoy what little freedoms we have left. I would like to see park users vetted to see they have paid their council registration. A significant proportion haven't. Canberra has an extensive network of 'recreation paths' that are largely ruled by cyclists. I'd like to see duplication of these paths to provide one for cyclists and one for everyone else (including young children on bikes). Cyclists are no more compatible with dogs, prams and kiddies than they are with cars. More bins, more bags, and more rangers would sure help a lot.

Irresponsibility stems from 2 primary causes IMO. Ignorance - of the right things to do or the consequence of doing the wrong thing. Education is the cure for ignorance. Indifference - not giving a toss if there are no negative consquences for you. The key there is to make some negative consequences - and that means laws and penalties. We've got the laws. They need to be enforced and penalties have to be truely aversive.

In the ACT, dogs that pass a certain level of obedience attract cheaper registration fees.

Moselle: So which is it? Moselle if temperament IS genetic, why wouldn't we be looking to judge a pup on its parentage? You either avoid the pups from parents with temperament issues or you don't. I am simply unable to follow your logic.

I think sometimes it has as much to do with what the owners are teaching (consciously or not) the dog as what it learns from another dog in the house. I also know folk with more than one DA dog (and not in breeds associated with it). Repetition of failure to effectively socialise, failure to provide boundaries , failure to acknowledge emerging issues AND learned responses from observing the other dog all seem to play a part.

Moselle: Well there goes any reason to develop purebreds in the first place. Its the fact that selective breeding increases the likelihood of traits that led to breed development. People got tired of taking pot luck on traits they wanted in dogs and wanted to improve the odds of getting what they wanted. Those who choose purebred pets today are using the same logic. If you don't care what size, coat, temperament and activity level you get in a dog, then you're far less choosy than most. You've changed your tune on heritabilty too Moselle. Not that long ago you said this: Based on your logic we can cheerfully breed HA dogs and take "pot luck" on what the puppies grow into. There's no more chance of such pups being HA than any other.

Yeesh - so for the first 5.5 months of her life she's had only partial immunity. I'd still not have done it today. Can you stop it happening? She'd be better of being done when she has her stitches out.

Pitbulls were developed to be dog aggressive - the chances of getting a DA one is higher in that breed because it was selected for and desireable in the breed when it was developed. On the other hand, to be handled at the level of arousal required for the fighting ring, they HAD to be very non people aggressive. A dog that couldn't be handled was a danger to its owner. That's a point made very strongly by breed defenders when accusations that the breed is "vicious" are levelled. If you're going to cite the arguments used by defenders of the breed when talking about attacks on people please get your facts straight. Irresponsible ownership is not confined to owners of this breed. Few posters are denigrating crossbred dogs. Some posters are promoting them - and that's a breach of forum rules. You seem to have particular trouble abiding by that rule Moselle. Thank you PF - answered better than I could. The whole point of purebred dogs is that its the very predictability of their traits that lead to breeds being developed and then bred on. A crossbred dog by virtue of its lineage is less preditable in terms of which traits it will inherit from its parents. Its a canine lottery. And, as I pointed out, when bred out of less than ideal specimens of any breed you get less than ideal pups. The difference between your average BYB cross of these breeds and well bred purebred parents is vast.

Pitbulls were developed to be dog aggressive - the chances of getting a DA one is higher in that breed because it was selected for and desireable in the breed when it was developed. On the other hand, to be handled at the level of arousal required for the fighting ring, they HAD to be very non people aggressive. A dog that couldn't be handled was a danger to its owner. That's a point made very strongly by breed defenders when accusations that the breed is "vicious" are levelled. If you're going to cite the arguments used by defenders of the breed when talking about attacks on people please get your facts straight. Irresponsible ownership is not confined to owners of this breed. Few posters are denigrating crossbred dogs. Some posters are promoting them - and that's a breach of forum rules. You seem to have particular trouble abiding by that rule Moselle.

Finnish Spitz is a hunting breed. Judging by the one I've met, they certainly have a prediliction for roaming.

My guess is the GSD was older and the Shih Tzu was younger at the time? Its a big ask for a tiny older dog to cope with the "attention" of a baby far bigger than it is. Your Shih Tzu is also not the most confident dog in the world and that matters also. This is the reason there will be no more pups for me before my older poodle goes to God. Little old dogs and bigger pups aren't that easy to manage I'm afraid. You seem to be getting some prey drive working also - that's a risk to the older dog. Actually it wasn't. The Shih was older and the GSD was a young pup. After two weeks of monitoring and training, the GSD got along well with the Shih Tzu and the resident cat (who has now passed). It was the same Shih Tzu too! How many years ago? The dog is older and that matters. My poodle boy gave many lessons to big silly puppies on respecting small dogs. He's simply not up to that task anymore and needs protection from them now. Get professional help annukya - this has real potential for an unhappy ending for your older dog IMO. Keep them separated.

My guess is the GSD was older and the Shih Tzu was younger at the time? Its a big ask for a tiny older dog to cope with the "attention" of a baby far bigger than it is. Your Shih Tzu is also not the most confident dog in the world and that matters also. This is the reason there will be no more pups for me before my older poodle goes to God. Little old dogs and bigger pups aren't that easy to manage I'm afraid. You seem to be getting some prey drive working also - that's a risk to the older dog.

Why is she being vaccinated at 5.5 months? . I'd never recommend this be combined with a surgical procedure that requires a full immune system for healing.