Maddy

Definitely. Down here, we pay $150ish to have a male dog desexed (bitches cost about $100 more). The green dream costs $40 without disposal. No trainer would desex and rehome a dog on the grounds that it was cheaper (not unless they were amazingly bad at maths)

Exactly. I have a pile of "pedigree" greyhounds right here- their lineage is known and they're registered (with Tasracing but registered is registered) - but they're definitely not rare creatures, unfortunately. If I had the room, I could have a hundred pedigreed greyhounds by the end of the week with just a couple of phone calls I have never met a breeder/owner who insisted on desexing dogs before giving them away and have seen god-knows how many entire dogs offered FTGH so I'd disagree strongly with you there. We have one trainer who desexes his dogs first but he does this as a donation (he asked how he could help out, we told him desexing was one of our biggest costs so he was happy to help that way). Edited to add.. Full pedigrees of most racing greyhounds are freely available on greyhound-data so the comment about pedigrees not being available is also very incorrect- not that even the dog's registration papers would be of any use as to breed registered dogs, you must be a registered breeder anyway. Of all the dogs we've had surrendered to us, we've NEVER had the owner refuse to give us information on the dog's breeding. We've had ONE dog who was surrendered by a trainer who didn't know her breeding as he rescued her from someone else, himself. Probably a good idea to do a bit of research before offering information as fact when that information couldn't be any further from the truth.

Probably a few breeds that would do very poorly if tested in a pound situation. Greyhounds are one- they're a sensitive breed of dog and most of the ones I've met in pounds have appeared cowering and miserable- not that they stay like that once you get them out, of course- it's just the constant barking, lack of comfy bedding, etc. makes them nervy and prone to what looks like extreme fear. I have no issues with the concept that not every dog is suitable for rehoming (I've failed a few dogs, myself) but when you have a rate of 49% when everyone around you is testing at at least half of that, you have to wonder if either the test itself or the manner in which it is done is disadvantaging the dogs somehow.

To play Devil's Advocate here.. It seems quite likely to me they've previously had negative experiences with dogs, possibly also relating to dogs in public housing. I live in a suburb that is roughly 50% public housing (split neatly down the middle) and the difference is huge- on the "bad" side, aggressive dogs, kept on chains, usually bull breeds or other "tough" looking dogs. On this side.. more "average" ownership (in terms of breeds or how they are kept). If someone had previously lived in an area with lots of public housing, it'd be understandable that they might have some strong biases because of what the "average" seems to be for some of those sorts of areas. I know my suburb is not unusual in this- the same applies to other public housing areas in Launceston and I'd have to assume from that, the rest of Tasmania and the mainland, to a certain extent. Edited to add.. Whether or not they are "private" occupiers is really beside the point. Contact the police, make reports of any harassment/threats.

I've noticed it's usually only the young fosters that do it. Our last girl (Sophie) was a bitey-face monster and if Doug got bored and tried to walk away, Sophie would bitey-leg him and follow him around (she was a few months younger). The ear licking though.. interesting that you mention that because I've only seen it as a habit in one pair of dogs and that's Kiff and our old girl, Sally. They're not "close" (he'd still growl at her over certain things) but we've had both of them for a few years now and the ear licking is something he only does to her. Doug seems interested in ear licking but then.. Doug is the sort of dog who'll try to squeeze himself into bed with any dog that doesn't growl too much at him, he's a bit of a tart :p

I think the only way to really say one way or the other would be to get hold of some decent surrender data (intakes aren't just "found" dogs, but also surrenders and dogs dumped in holding pens). I know that down here, a major reason for surrendering pets is lack of money to feed them. Another reason (for the SWFs) is that the dogs become matted and the owners can't afford to have them clipped on a regular basis. Needing to eat and have hair clipped aren't faults with the dog. Another common reason is moving house- again, nothing wrong with the dogs. The other obvious question is.. if other open admission shelters/pounds can rehome unclaimed dogs at a much higher rate (while still temp and health testing), what are the RSPCA doing differently to have such a considerable difference in figures?

Yep, it's called fear aggression Anne and a bite from a terrified dog will hurt just as much as any other bite. Seriously, people need to get real about dogs going out into society. Adoptive families have a right to be given a dog that won't harm them under normal circumstances and temperament testing is the best a shelter can do to approximate what a dog might come up against. Lets hear a sensible alternative proposed rather than the usual "you're doing it wrong" approach. Just a question here.. In your opinion, would you say that roughly 50% of dogs are not safe pets?

I actually had a discussion with Shel from PetRescue about this and worked out all the numbers and frankly.. yeah, they were pretty shocking. On the bright side.. got all the numbers already worked out :D Not sure how to link to that discussion so I'll just copy/paste some of the discussion here here (these numbers were obtained using figures published pubically by the organisations concerned) Shel digs out some annual reports for me, I work out the numbers.. Basically, of unclaimed intakes (the dogs being tested) in RSPCA-run shelters/pounds, 49.9% fail in NSW and are put to sleep. Worth noting here that we didn't have the time or information to get enough samples of numbers to get the most accurate percentages for the average for other groups but it was a a broad enough selection to provide a decent average to work with. Actual figure might be slightly higher or lower.

Bit of a scam then really isn't it if they are just re-packaging products well known to the industry rather than offering something unique as the marketing implies. I note their products are now being sold in supermarkets. Well.. I suppose they've seen a niche that can be filled very cheaply (but at high profit) so being a business, they're using that to their advantage. Package something in a way that looks more suitable to pet dogs (complete with friendly, airy-fairy descriptions) and it'll appeal to most people. A lot of the greyhound and horse supplements are packaged fairly plainly in white plastic tubs (that look very livestock-ish) that don't have pictures of frolicking dogs on them or much in the way of product advertising because for their own market, they don't need it. While it's a clever idea (and one that gets a lot more use than you'd guess*), I think it's a bit unethical to exploit ignorance of cheaper (probably better quality) products. And on principle, I'd never buy any of their products again. *A good example there is coconut oil. A 1L tub for humans.. $19.50. Compare to a 250ml tub "specially for pets" made by the same company, containing the exact same product (I checked, it's absolutely no different) and it's $12.50. So you're paying more than double the price- but one has "for pets" on the label so.. basically you're paying for the extra words. Another good one is apple cider vinegar. Slap a dog sticker on the front and you can charge more than triple the amount for the same product.

Most of mine aren't keen on it either so I figured out a sneaky way to get it into their food. Several nights a week, they get a chicken frame stuffed with mince and then frozen- so, measure out livamol, mix it through a couple of small bits of mince, pack it into the chicken frame along with normal mince and then freeze. Freezing it seems to cut down the smell a fair bit and because the livamol is hidden on the inside along with normal mince, they don't seem to notice it. Failing that, a small ball of lamb/roo mince blend (roo smells very strong so covers it well) and them smear a dab of peanut butter on it for a few days until they get the idea that the mince isn't going to kill them. As a last resort, I bake it into dog cookies but I have no idea if this damages the fats beyond the point of making it useless Something to look into, when I have more time.

Most of their supplements look suspiciously like the sorts of products you can buy in large, cheap tubs for greyhounds or horses :p

:D Note to self.. when buying Bosley-sized box to send to Rebanne, also buy Doug-sized box..

Tasmania is a bit different, the important bit bolded.. So, without a warrant, in Tasmania, an officer could not enter your house but could enter your yard or any other buildings not used as a dwelling (sheds, etc). Unfortunately, this also means that in the event of an emergency, a warrant is still required and the process could result in the death of the animal. I suppose it's a very tricky area because on one hand, you're granting power that could be abused, on the other, officers don't have enough power to act when it really matters. The problem with this sort of legislation is that it is forced to rely on opinion of the officer, rather than set standards for emergency entry.

Judging by how incredibly tolerant my adult dogs are of our grey puppy, I'd have to say yes. I put the puppy out with the foster boy (the Doug) and then stood back, expecting to see the puppy at least get told off a few times (which was sort fo the point of it, his dog manners are pretty bad) but even as Bosley was ripping and chewing at Doug's neck, Doug just stood there, tail wagging in a relaxed way and his body language sort of "meh, whatever". Our older bitch was a little less tolerant and told him off once or twice but still very gently compared to how she would react to an adult dog doing the same thing. Generally, the adults are very mindful of him and probably more tolerant than I'd actually like -because, as mentioned, his dog manners are crap and I'd hoped time with adult dogs would help him learn what the boundaries are.

A couple of split/swollen lips from The Douginator launching himself at my face for cuddles (usually when I've been leaning over to do something and my face is within easy reach), currently a set of gouges down the back of one of my thighs from where the puppy thought we were playing a game of slappy paws- he did a sort of.. jumpy-slap, came down awkwardly and even though I was wearing trousers, it still left deep, red marks (which are also a bit bruised, to make it look even better). And plenty of bruises from over-enthusiastic greetings. Worst of those was from a foster who liked to stand on her hind legs to be cuddled- she jumped up at my back and accidentally scratched it when it was already badly sunburnt. The pain was ungodly. The worst I can recall was probably from Doug, he zoomied in for a lean and didn't put the brakes on in time, his shoulder hit my thigh at about 20km/h and left a massive bruise that was painful for weeks afterward. If he hadn't of turned a bit at the last moment, I have no doubt he might have broken his neck or severely injured himself (typically though, The Doug walked away uninjured)

Perhaps I'm reading it wrong but it sounds like a member of whichever shelter would be there permanently running the adoptions section. I think it's a step in the right direction but only if managed for the welfare of the animals involved. No glass boxes, no adoptions done without an application form to determine suitability and so on. Still leaves the question of homechecks but as far as I know, the RSPCA don't bother with those anyway so it'd be no different to adopting directly from the shelter.

I used to read a lot here, now it's just.. wander past computer, hit refresh, reply to anything that looks interesting when I remember to go back. Late evenings are a bit different. Still waiting on one last, slow hound to finish his dinner and can't go to bed until that happens so.. Dol time :D Generally though.. it'd have to be at least one hour a day. And I've been a member for.. five years. So.. 1825 hours, if you assume only one hour a day *coughit'ssometimeslotsmorethanthatcough*

You might find that after eating canned food (which is full of salt) that he may refuse other things. When we get dogs like this, they don't get offered anything else (and we've yet to have one starve to death :p ) and within a week, they're eating the raw food. The only issue we ever have with this is dogs who aren't used to chewing- so we start them on raw mince, go to chicken necks, then wings and then finally frames. If they can manage raw frames, it's then frozen frames and raw lamb flaps. The problem with canned food is that jaw muscles don't get the exercise they need and the dog has to work much harder to chew raw food (which makes it less appealing) so best to take it slow, rather than trying once or twice and then giving up. It does take a bit of willpower to resist the sad eyes but for your dog's health, it's worth it.

Sounds like it might be fly bites but without seeing a picture.. We've found that one drop of Advocate on the outside of the ear (for drop-earred breeds, just down from the fold) seems to reduce the problem a bit and some Panalog around the edges will stop them from stratching it into more of a mess. We only ever see it on white/lighter coloured dogs though (pink skin shows through the fur and attracts the flies). Either way, best to see your vet- fairly sure the Panalog is by script only.

I tried ToTW to supplement our grey pup's diet and found the same thing. Made even worse by the fact he sleeps on the floor by my side of the bed and the horrific dog farts were actually waking me up several times a night. Also, the size of his stools on ToTW were unbelievable- if it weren't for the fact he toilets in an area the adult dogs can't access, I would've assumed it was theirs and someone had been sneak-feeding them Pal or something. Also tried BlackHawk and found it made him hyperactive. Currently, we're back to entirely raw for him and he's looking great. It is possible to raw-feed puppies but definitely something to research very thoroughly and be prepared to make changes/compromises. Personally, I wouldn't feed commercially prepared "raw" either, I source my meat from a local producer who will actually slaughter to order so everything is fresh and has absolutely nothing added. The downside to this is that the meat doesn't have the same shelf-life of even supermarket meat for humans but.. judging from the texture, smell and look of it, the dogs are probably eating better than I am :p

There is a difference between stating your opinion and attacking the opinion of another person based on assumptions about their personal biases. My opinion of the poster concerned had nothing to do with how long he's been around but the fact he made some very unfair judgements regarding the OP and when he was called on them, fell back to the "waaaaah, you just hate bull breeds" crap to defend himself.

It is obvious from..? The bit where I said I thought all bull breeds should be made restricted or.. the bit where I said bull breeds were evil dogs or was it some other imaginary bit that you're drawing your assumption from? Most idiotic thing I have ever read and I'd be happy to take the warning from Troy for pointing that out. Anyway.. I'm not going to re-point out your backpedaling (I've already pointed it out for you) so I'm afraid that if you're really that incapable of comprehending why your posts are contradictory, I can't help you.

Yet despite this knowledge, you insist the dog's behaviour is normal while in the same breath, stating that bull arabs are unfairly targetted- you see where I'm going with this? Anyway, moving on.. Yet complain about other people exercising caution around certain breeds of dog that you've already are "normally" expected to display dangerous levels of dog agrgression? Righto. I'm afraid I'm a little confused here, possibly because of all the backpedaling. Didn't you say in an earlier post.. And I'm done. As an aside, trying to guilt the OP over her feelings is in very poor form. It's a hard enough decision to make without armchair experts weighing in and implying that the OP somehow brought it on herself

As someone who often has young, male dogs (and usually entire until they pass all testing), I'd very strongly disagree with this. Posturing is normal, minor spats are acceptable but what the OP described does not sound like normal behaviour to me. Regarding Alyosha's comment, I'm afraid I have to agree with her. We will take in greyhound crosses but not "bull arabs" or any other variation of the type (for the reasons Alyosha mentions). No offense intended, Staffydave, but I think your attitude to the situation is a dangerously misinformed one. I have no breed prejudices (I own and rescue a breed that a lot of people are still prejudiced against) and personally, I prefer the bull and mastiff types over many other types BUT.. at the same time, you have to be able to respect what your dogs may be capable of or more inclined to do than other breeds. Some breeds of dog are more prone to dog aggression, others are prone to higher prey drives and so on- these traits are there because we've encouraged them (there's nothing "bad" about them) but we have to respect and acknowledge those traits to be better dog owners. Shoving your fingers in your ears and refusing to hear that some dogs are more likely to tend towards certain behaviours than others is very foolish and frankly, if I saw you out walking your dogs (knowing you had no respect for what they were), I'd cross the street to avoid you, too.

Definitely agree with this. I've had a dog take a chunk out of another dog's neck while wearing a muzzle- muzzles absolutely cannot be relied upon unless you intend to supervise very closely, regardless of the type of muzzle or how it is fitted. Muzzles may give you more time to react to a fight but lethal injuries can be inflicted within seconds so as Persephone said, safer to just keep them away from each other until you can get professional help. I've had a young male dog like this before and my own opinions on dogs like this aside (I'd probably PTS), I'd suggest being very careful how you work on it- we ended up having an attack on his chosen victim that involved a badly ripped neck and a hole torn into the victim's chest that was fist sized. The victim only survived because I was able to get to them within less than a minute of the fight starting.