poodlefan

The next person who tells me Labs metablise food differently to all other breeds or that Labs don't have the capacity to feel full is going to see me resisting the urge to give them a stinging slap. The problem lies with owners. And when you see those obese animals when you know how they can look, its a tragedy. Why wouldn't someone want a Lab that looks like this instead. The fact that a good proportion of Labs in the show ring look like beef cattle doesn't help.

I can. but it ain't pretty .

This is why I shudder when I see all the x bred oodles with long hair on their muzzles.

Provided the name passes the "happy to scream it at 120 decibels" test, I don't think it matters how long it is.

Have you seen a fight involving a muzzled dog? I haven't, so I'm guessing, but as I said before, I wonder if a muzzled dog in a fight is in any more danger than an unmuzzled dog. How are they going to defend themselves? By doing damage with their teeth? Is that going to make it safer for them? Is the other dog going to even notice? If they do, are they going to back down, or go in harder? If I have a leashed and muzzled dog fighting, I am in a pretty good position for breaking it up quickly, and there's one less set of teeth to dodge. What are the chances of the dog that starts the fight delivering uninhibited bites in the first place? It's not that common IME. And I go to dog parks everyday. I've seen a few fights, and usually everyone comes out of it upset, but with not a scratch on them. I'm just saying, I would rather have a 'defenceless' dog than one with its teeth burried in another dog or someone's arm. As for whether they behave worse with a muzzle on... Presumably they have to learn that they can't defend themselves before they get worse, which means you've already had incidents where other dogs might have been in danger if it hadn't been for the muzzle, which kind of supports my opinion that it's not a bad idea to use one in the first place? It's just my opinion, though. No one need get defensive. The answer to both questions would be a resounding YES. All the muzzle does is stop the dog connecting. That's why they muzzle bait dogs.. the attacking dog gets all the hits in and the defending dog cannot inflict damage in return. In canine defence, if flight's out there's only fight left. Teeth play a very big role if there's a fight on. Talk to racing greyhound owners Corvus. They are required to walk their dogs muzzled. I've heard plenty of stories about muzzled greys having pieces taken off them by offlead dogs that attack them. If you think you can protect a leashed and muzzled dog from an offlead dog or dogs in a dog fight, all I can say is you've not seen dogs that intend to do harm. It's a melee of movement and teeth and the dog restained cannot flee and if muzzled cannot fight. Your best chance is before the fight starts.. after that, chances are you'll be on your arse spilled by your dog's lead as it attempts to get away while leashed or requiring microsurgery because you got yourself too close to the bitey end of the attacker. The result of unmuzzled dog attacking muzzled and restrained dog tends to be a vet visit or worse for the dog. Bait dogs don't have long lives. If a dog or person gets close enough to a leashed dog under effective owner control to take a bite, then how in hell is that the leashed dog's fault. Dogs known to start fights might need to be muzzled by why any owner should leave their dog defenceless on the odd chance it might defend itself beats me.

I know a few that have taken photos and handed the matter on to the RSPCA.

A lot of dogs really don't tolerate soy well. You'd be getting a fair bit of wind out of quite a few.

Well, there's "should" and then there's what is. I'm not saying people with dogs that might do damage should keep them muzzled in public, but I think I would. The reason why I would be the one to take further steps is because I figure if I have an animal that is likely to cause harm in certain circumstances, it is my responsibility to make sure I prevent that. Just doing my bit by leashing my dog is ignoring the fact that some people do the wrong thing and I would consider that a breach of my responsibility to prevent my dog harming others. Muzzle the dog, then everyone is safe no matter what happens, who is the idiot, or which dogs are owned by idiots. It's not the dog's fault they aren't being kept on leash, so why should they have to pay? What's more, if your dog is muzzled, I bet you people will try harder to keep their dogs away from yours in the first place. It's a clear signal of potential danger. Everyone except the muzzled dog that is. It will be unable to defend itself if its reaction to an offleash dog starts a fight. On leash and muzzled, it will be defenceless.

I socialise my dogs with the dogs of people I know. That's it. Public dog parks are way to risky for the little dogs I think. I know that folk have been using them for years without incident but I also know people who've lost small dogs to attacks and it's a risk I'm simply not prepared to take. I think its the equivalent of expecting your toddler to deal with anything a bunch of 16 year olds are prepared to toss at them. Ah, no.

Holy cow.. its a canine Dumbo!! Seriously nice dog.

The hanging risk is one issue but the other reason I don't like them is the dog is forced to hold the position for a long time. In grooming there's lots of mini breaks while you change blades, scissors or angles. The dog gets to move around and rest while you do. There's no "down time" for a dog in noose and/or harness IMO. They look like a pain in the arse to work around and fit too IMO.

You forgot the employment of grooming nooses and harness for dogs that won't stand. Its physical restraint even if its not the groomer's hands doing it. Personally if a bit of growling and physical placement will teach my dogs to stand still (they do anyway) for grooming I'd WAY prefer that to seeing a dog in a grooming noose...

Ah yes the old 30# blade special.. or a 50# on a bad day.

Lavendergirl, the only safe place to groom a sedated dog is under veterinary supervision. Sedation was for years the "quick fix" for difficult dogs and frankly I'd NEVER use a groomer who employed it. If your focus is the best interests of the dog, then I think you need to review your thoughts on sedation. A sedated dog will generally have issues with temperature control also.. how wise do you think it is to use heated dryers or cages in those circumstances? Using sedation for grooming is no longer best practice for professional grooming unless the dog is a severe matting case and difficult to handle - same goes with using sedation for travelling. Clients with the best interests of their dogs at heart start them off with regular grooming as pups and book them in no less often than every six weeks for the works. Sadly those kind of clients aren't as common as they should be and when a groomer is confronted with a matted dog that's difficult to handle then placing a few boundaries on the dog's behavior is required. That can be done without abuse and if the owner can't or won't do it, then it falls to the groomer I'm afraid. Christina may have clients willing to regularly pay two groomers to spend three hours on a difficult dog.. not many groomers do.

Any reason why he couldn't wear a martingale or limited slip collar?

Yes!! Of course you should. If they took him back and he was deemed not suitable for rehoming, he would be put to sleep. Given that he's already blooded two dogs, I'd not be rehoming him. You might also get his thyroid levels checked. THey can be an issue in Goldens and can be linked to aggression BUT the simple explanation may simply be that this is a dog with an unstable temperament that represents a risk to other dogs in society. Don't lose sight of that.

This. The RSPCA employs behavioural trainers and they may be able to help. At the very least, this dog requires reassessment in terms of temperament and your Dad deserves to have some help or to have the dog taken back by them. This situation requires professional assessment/intervention - and the RSPCA is in a position to provide it.

It can be justified if it gets results. Qualifications are good but results are everything, especially when it comes to dealing with serious aggression.

Toy Poodles are tough drivey little buggers generally - often more go than the Minis. Often more vocal than the minis too. ;) I prefer more spunky dogs too.

Henrietta, if you are looking towards little sports dogs, I'd suggest you look at Paps, Poodles and CKCS's. There's a lady locally who breedes cracking drivey Cavs.. awesome little dogs. I'm not generally a fan of Cavs but I'd have one of hers.

As far as I'm concerned professional grooming is dirty demanding work that doesn't pay at all well. The only dogs I will ever be interested in grooming are my own and the odd needy case. If the dogs aren't arseholes, chances are their owners are. Most decent groomers are saints IMO. I honestly don't know how they keep doing it.

Abuse? Big call for someone who wasn't there I think. If a scruffing and a yelling ONCE delivers the goods, it sure beats hell out of having to have the dog rendered incapable of moving in a grooming harness or sedated to groom it. Exactly HOW else would you recommend any groomer groom a dog that won't stand? Have you got any experience at all in dog grooming? I think I know the answer. It's dangerous to groomer and dog to try to clip a squirming animal. Perhaps a few hours in a grooming salon might be educative.

Most of the Paps I've met have been sports or show dogs. Lively, pretty, smart as whips and yes, yappy. Never seen any indication of aggession but I honestly think they're a bit too much dog to sit at home and do nothing. They need regular exercise and training IMO to be content. They also need owners who are smarter than they are and some.... well they aren't. Maybe they should be moved to Group 5. ;)

This is why you're at vet nurse and I'm .. not Stormie ;) I find lots of dogs positively unloveable. Mostly its owner created but it doesn't change the fact that they're a bloody pain in the arse. As far as I'm concerned someone who says "they love all dogs" is either a saint or a person who needs to meet more dogs.

Looks like its easy come, easy go for some owners. It would probably cost more to euthanise their pet than they paid to get it.. and they'd be thinking that way too. As for the council being "shocked".. what the hell did they expect would be the reaction to the changes in the laws. :rolleyes: