Maddy

I actually contacted DPIPWE about that issue and was given the name of the officer employed by their department to enforce the laws. If you want her phone number, just let me know. I'm really relieved that we have something at least now. We had a woman across the road from us who sounds a bit like your neighbour- it was a constant stream of kittens, most were ending up feral, getting hit by cars or otherwise disappearing, it was a very upsetting situation because at the time, it was all perfectly legal. I can think of another example of why I'm so grateful for the new laws but that's probably something best reserved for PMs *cough*

In Tasmania, cat breeders who are registered with CCCTas are exempt from the desexing requirement. Breeding cats must still be vaccinated and microchipped though. Tasmania's new cat laws are surprisingly good- they've covered a lot of potential loop-holes while still allowing for responsible breeding of registered cats. I haven't read the WA laws to see how they compare but Tasmanian laws are here- http://www.thelaw.tas.gov.au/tocview/index.w3p;cond=;doc_id=89%2B%2B2009%2BAT%40EN%2B20130407000000;histon=;prompt=;rec=;term=

While I can't see the sense in muzzling properly trained working dogs, some of the comments made by farmers do show a lack of knowledge when it comes to muzzles. The sort of muzzle that can be bought in a pet shop- the nylon type that encases the dog's muzzle tightly) is obviously dangerous (for all dogs) because it prohibits them from opening their mouth properly which could lead to overheating through inability to pant or drink. But.. a decent basket muzzle is not the same thing. Greyhounds race in a basket muzzle and not only are they a breed prone to overheating, but they're engaging in a sport that requires them to be able to breathe freely. A basket muzzle does not inhibit breathing, panting or drinking. Fitting a muzzle correctly is no more difficult than fitting a collar and it shouldn't be on the dog for long enough periods of time to cause any issues anyway. I think farmers would do better to provide sensible reasons, rather than making statements that aren't accurate.

But not all dogs can adapt to being in a new place away from their owners. I know of some who have adapted, but some don't. I think the original owner knows best whether their dog would be happy being re-homed or not. By this same logic though, dogs that are dumped by their owners at pounds are also better off dead because they too could be mourning the loss of their family and "suffering" without them. I've actually had a greyhound surrendered to me from a pet home and the poor girl didn't eat for a week, she was terribly heartbroken. Until a few weeks later when she'd forgotten about them entirely, was eating like a horse and very happy. She just needed time to settle into the new routine in the new place and that was it. Dogs aren't attached to us in the same way that we're attached to them. Anthropomorphising them does them no good, especially when it ends this way- with a healthy, young dog, dead.

Yeah. I looked a bit mongy in the photo, hopefully pretty fawn greyhound was enough to distract most people :D

Frankly, I'm amazed that they bothered. The RSPCA in Tasmania (the Launceston branch more than the others) have a really bad reputation, especially after the leaked reports of basic animal welfare being neglected at the shelter and one of their own inspectors saying she believed seized animals should be held elsewhere as the shelter posed a serious risk to their health.

Honestly, I don't think you can ever win when you're up against crazy. For example, I rescue (don't breed) and was told that because I sell dogs (i.e adopt them out), that I'm in the animal exploitation business and am therefore a murderer :laugh: If I were you, MUP, I'd not worry too much about it. Having said that, I believe there have been cases of rescuers breeding rescue dogs and selling the pups and that is the lowest of the low.

I know this is probably a minor point but.. Animal Liberation are not an animal welfare organisation, they're animal rights. There is a very big difference between the two. They prove themselves to be animal rights by being willing to risk animal welfare to further their own agenda As for the privacy issue, seems pretty obvious to me. Whether or not farmers have anything to hide is beside the point- sending drones out over someone's property to take pictures is an invasion of privacy.

I have to use Chrome to be able to upload photos at all and even then, sometimes it just seems to do nothing. Other times, it looks like it's done nothing but then the photo has been uploaded

One of my dogs (the hellhound puppy) is not a keen chewer so I cut up his frames for him. Got it down to a fine art :D First step is to trim off all the flappy fat at the back end up the frame. I save this for bribery for things like worming (small pieces for each dog though as it's almost all fat). Then, I start by cutting from the back end up towards the front, scissors lined up as closely as I can get them to the spine, cutting through where the ribs join the spine. Then a roughly parallel cut starting at the end of the breast cartillege/bone and angling back downward towards the end of the first cut. This gives you chicken "flaps" (the ribs) - not much fat on these and easy to eat. Then I cut up around the rest of the breast bones, removing it from the rest of the carcass. The breast cartillege* can then be cut into thin slices and added to the bowl with the flaps. The breast bone that can't be cut is usually the very hard bone so I feed this to one of the kitchen helpers. Then you're left with what looks like the underside but is actually the back. The tail can be easily cut off (I cut that into a couple of chunks as it's just the right size for a silly greyhound pup to choke on) and add to the bowl. Then you have all the back fat- I slice that off, add a small amount to the bowl and share the rest between the helpers. Finally, there's more neck- you can cut this by bending it one way until you see a gap between the bones and then cut the gap. If you're worried about feeding any neck, cut it between the bones into smaller pieces and add to bowl. You're left with just a small, flat section of back. I use a spoon to scrape out the squishy stuff (hellhound puppy loves the squishy stuff) and the leftover piece gets given to a helper. What you end up with is some bone for chewing (ribs and cartillege), the connective tissue, a controlled amount of fat and a small amount of meat/squishy stuff. Most frames are very thoroughly stripped of muscle meat so personally, I'd not feed as a meal. I take the frame apart and then mix a small handful of roo mince through the chicken bits. If you have a smaller dog, you could still do this and then just scoop half (or more) the mixed chicken/whatever back out and put it in the fridge for the next day. It sounds a bit time-consuming but if you have a dog who can't/won't chew much, it's definitely better than not having them chewing at all. *There's heaps of marrow in this so it's worth the extra effort.

If you think threatening people with lawsuits will scare them away from asking you questions here, you may find yourself disappointed. Not only have you not been defamed here but people have been quite gentle with you. If you don't want people to assume you train using Cesar Millan's methods, it might be a good idea to remove the identical phrasing from your website. Trying to bully people into being quiet will make some people wonder why you're so reactive to questioning, by the way. There's a certain other group who also throws around threats of lawsuits and if you keep behaving like them, people are going to start to assume you might be involved with that group someone (or maybe are just seeing the same solicitor as them :laugh: )

Why expect people to explain their concerns when you've come in and done what you've just complained about Nobody here said this person was evil so in my opinion, what you've said is far worse than what anyone here has said. That aside, I'd suggest you go back and read the thread more carefully. The people who have expressed concerns are people who are experienced rescuers, fosters carers or breeders- most have a sound understanding of aggression and the implications of rehoming aggressive dogs (regardless of whether or not those dogs have been "rehabilitated". No rescue group- especially not ones who rehome potentially dangerous dogs- should be above scrutiny.

Exactly. Prey drive is not a fault or a problem to be fixed. In certain breeds of dog, prey drive is selected for, it is a natural trait and I'm always wary of any person who claim they can "treat" prey drive.

Oh, how I miss the Mister Rolley Eyes emote. Basically, a Cesar Millan wannabe. Choke it, pinch it, kick it into being "calm submissive" (i.e. terrified and shut down) and call the problem solved. Just what rescue needs. Hi Hardy's Angel you have any questions im happy to answer them. One thing don't call me Cesar you don't know me, im nothing like him and i will never be. You use lots of wording that is lifted directly from Cesar Millan's material. The relevant wording is bolded. Talking about making dogs "submissive" is subscribing to the dominance theory- a theory which has been soundly disproven.

That sounds.. fairly unsafe.

Finding an address for him seems next to impossible but I did notice that he's "sponsored" by the Box Hill vet. Not being familiar with NSW, this could be next to the pope's house for all I know :p

Apply Cesar's voice to the website and it flows very nicely. Just the thought of someone "rehabilitating" dangerous dogs in the CM fashion and then offloading them into unsuspecting homes makes me cringe. I should invite him down here to make Sally cat safe. He'll need to bring a fair few cats with him though as I have a feeling Sally would "learn" slowly >.>

The use of the word "expert" without any mention of formal training got my attention so I had more of a look through the website.. Oh, how I miss the Mister Rolley Eyes emote. Basically, a Cesar Millan wannabe. Choke it, pinch it, kick it into being "calm submissive" (i.e. terrified and shut down) and call the problem solved. Just what rescue needs.

We don't get heartworm down here so I don't actually worm for it. I rotate wormers so they get a Heartgard Plus about three times a year (which covers heartworm, roundworms and hookworms). As I understand it, the dose rate of ivermectin in Heartgard is safe for the collie-related breeds.

For worming, I prefer to go over, rather than under. At worst, they'll have loose poo the next day, better than not giving them enough to actually clean up an infestation and possibly creating worms that are now more resistant to the active ingredients used. I'm not a huge fan of chews because they tend to have absurdly broad weight ranges- there's a big difference between 20kg and 45kg. I stick to things like the Wormex, Canimax* or Paratak Plus as these are 10kg tablets so getting a closer dose is a lot easier. *Canimax might be 20kg, I forget.. but either way, still easier to split than a chew.

You'd be surprised what they can do when they're in that headspace. I'd have a greyhound barge past me (through the garage door) and not only would I not have been able to stop him (not unless I was as wide as the door) but even trying to avoid him as he came past, I got left with some very bad bruises up my leg from where he clipped me. And he was going at a leisurely 20km/h or so- a greyhound doing 60km/h and focused on an actual chase.. you'd not just have no hope in hell of stopping them, you'd likely end up seriously injured if they hit you on the way past. I've just seen too many accidents to be willing to take those risks with greyhounds. As for recall.. when there is no chase involved, recall can be good. My old boy recalls like a champ when we work in the yard together but if he sees a cat out on a walk, I might as well not exist. That's normal for the breed, they are a sighthound.

The offlead thing isn't so much about prey drive as it is about greyhounds being more likely to run off and their terrible road sense. It is for their safety that they be walked on lead- imagine how you might have felt if that dog had gotten away from you, run out onto the road after something interesting and been hit by a car. People ignoring the laws because it pleases them are not doing the right thing by their dogs, simple as that.

So clever :D My guys would just sniff it and then sad-face me- "I can smell foods but is hidden by magic wood D:"

Is this every state, and does it apply to non-race bred greys? I thought that was the case, but there is a grey in my local dog park that is always off-lead, muzzle-free with no special identification so I wondered if maybe it wasn't. What I have said applies to Victoria, to all greyhounds including show bred. You can exhibit greyhounds at sanctioned events, shows, agility, obedience etc, without a muzzle. NSW has only recently bought in the green collars (muzzle free) but I understand, for things I have read, that greyhounds are allowed off lead, but should still be muzzled if not previously tested and excempt. It's the same in Tasmania- muzzled (we have no green collar system) unless being shown, participating in agility trials or participating in obedience trials. Some groups down here tell people not to muzzle their dogs because they believe muzzle laws are BSL. Personally, I think some greyhounds do need to be muzzled if they're going to be released to pet homes.