Maddy

Liver broth has always worked well for us with dogs that have depressed appetites. Pretty easy to make- roughly chop up some beef liver, put it in a pot of boiling water (about five cups of water), open all your windows when the smell hits, boil for about 15 minutes and then go outside for some fresh air. After that, strain out the liver chunks (these can then be cut a little smaller and dried in the oven to make liver treats) and return the water to the stove. Boil it down for another fiften minutes or so until you have what looks like gravy. Allow the broth to cool and them skim off any fat if it's unwanted (although the fat is apparently good if the dog can tolerate it). The broth is quite strong so you only need to add a small amount to something else. Warm a few teaspoons in the microwave and then pour over things like kibble, stirring it through so the dog doesn't just pick out the wet bits. Probably worth mentioning that liver is a "sometimes" food (because of the vitamin A content) and does need to be prepared properly because of the hydatids risk (which isn't to the dog itself, rather, the humans around it). Beef liver is safer than sheep liver, for hydatids.

I have greyhounds and they are leashed and muzzled at all times in public. This is for their own safety- recall is difficult to train reliably in sighthounds and if they ran off and got hurt, I would consider that to be my fault. And to be blunt here.. I think your comment was pretty inappropriate anyway and only intended to get a rise out of the people you disagreed with. It doesn't matter what other people are doing, the OP made a bad choice, his dog suffered the consequences, end of story.

We have lifetime Rego here in NSW, and all my cats (but Zero who will be done next week) are registered. dont you guys have to register cats? Nope. Chips are also optional still for cats. Also no laws regarding cat numbers, provided they have the basics (water, food and access to shelter) which undoubtedly contributes even further to the problem.

Looks like someone was on the receiving end of the ban hammer :D Back on topic.. We see lots of dead cats on the roads around here. Often you can see a collar somewhere in the mess but should members of the public have to pull over and play "Find the name tag in what appears to be a cat's bowels" because the some cat owners refuse to understand the risks? Maybe cat owners should be paying registration too- the proceeds can be used to supply each homeowner in the council area with a pair of disposable rubber gloves and some kind of prodding/scraping tool (especially for those cats that get flattened in the middle of the road and need to be moved).

A dog that breaks its lead and attacks like this because it was startled is a very dangerous dog and should be declared dangerous. No matter how it behaves when it isn't in the mood to attack. This is the sort of dog that we don't need out in our community at all. I'm surprised that anyone would try to excuse such horrifically destructive behaviour. There is no excuse for that. I have to agree with this. If a dog is unstable enough to severely attack another dog for moving into its space, it should probably be muzzled when out in public for everyones' safety. The breed doesn't matter there- any dog can cause damage. I do think the OP should've been more careful, however - I've had a hound ripped open from shoulder to loin by a -nip- from another dog, the grey jumped at just the wrong time and it basically peeled her skin back like a banana. They're delicate dogs and against most other breeds, would come off second best. If you're walking your grey on lead, you can at least control the environment around the dog to a certain extent.

Done and PM sent

Slightly off topic here but.. I think any decent therapist would actually recommend against venting aggressive feelings in the ways you've described as it does nothing to train impulse control and only feeds aggression through rewarding it and externalising it. Part of being an adult is learning to deal with those sorts of emotions internally, rather than chucking a pillow-bashing tantrum like a small child.

Can you PM me about this? Replied to the email from the adopter, just need some info. I'm mostly free tomorrow so if possible, I'd like to get it done then as the rest of my week is looking (including the weekend) really tight, owing to a foster dog who's currently high needs.

I think most people (and the law) would not be okay with that. Setting an animal to attack someone, regardless of species, is a stupid and dangerous thing to do. The human could get hurt, the animal could get hurt and in the case of a bull.. a person could very easily be killed. If someone was killed that way, "They were stealing my nuts" is not going to be much of a defence.

They do look nice but yeah.. for people with a bed-eater, probably your worst nightmare :p I was considering one of those custom-made beanbag beds for the foster hounds but "indestructible" often seems to mean "reists a bit of wear and tear", not.. "resists being pounced on, chewed, dug, dragged around and shaken like some kind of expensive piñata until it gives up its stash of foam or filling" so I'm iffy on them because cleaning up foam or filling is bad enough, let alone beanbag filling!

My intehwebs doesn't seem to agree with me using the quote function directly to answer posts this evening so.. Yep, GG, I was agreeing with you. And sort of disagreeing with Erny, but probably should've quoted that for clarification. Hopefully this won't crash my intehwebs again.. Perhaps in some breeds but I'd be literally mind-blown (as in, you'd be having to dry-clean my brains off your clothes, from all the way over there) if a greyhound responded that way. I have little doubt that even if I actually grabbed someone, started shaking them and screaming for my dogs to help, the most help I'd likely get is them frolicking giddily around, enjoying the exciting sounds and the movement. That kind of response simply isn't normal for the breed, in my opinion- guarding instinct should not be there.

Yes, it wouldn't have been the parents of the child who were at fault . It is his right as a child to go into other's yards and steal. I totally agree! However in the eyes of the law and the anti-dog doogooders if a dog attacked a child in this situation you can get your bottom dollar it would be the dog and the owner who are at fault with the dog being PTS Nope. Read the law. A dog that attacks in its own backyard is not generally held to be at fault. Under normal circumstances I'd agree...however given that one of the dogs is a Staffordshire Bull Terrier....the media would have a field day, the anti-dog lobby would join in and the end result would be the same. That was my thought... And with the other being a grey hound... I know their image is slowly improving, but there is still the non believers out there I honestly don't think the average greyhound would even think to bite an "intruder" (although admittedly none of mine ever seem to do thinking in general so..) Of all the greys we'd had through here, all the visitors we've had come and go (including people coming in to do stuff while we were out), there's never been any behaviour like that, they just don't seem interested in guarding. Of course.. a greyhound standing back and watching a child get bitten - probably watching with that slightly slow, special greyhound face on, like they're trying to think but it hurts or something - is still a greyhound at the scene of a attack and guilty just by being present. Add to that a staffordshire BULL terrier and the media would have the perfect story. I'd be politely informing the parents that any children found wandering the property would be assumed strays and handed in to the nearest police station. Rural areas are no place for small children to wander unsupervised- dogs are the least of their worries, really.

Because some groups and some people have been found to have extremely questionable ethics and practices, it doesn't make it right to shoot first and demand explainations later simply because someone new comes onto the DOL scene. As was done in this case. No one was "shot first". Someone asked a question, people responded with what information they had available to them. The response was antagonistic and really quite rude. If a group wants to make legal threats against anyone who discusses them, they should expect that not only will the rescue community not trust them but also will refuse to work with them (for a number of reasons). Rescue isn't just pulling dogs from pounds- it's working with other people and if you can't do that like an adult, you're probably not going to last long anyway.

Kenreb wasn't exactly asked "simple questions". The organisations' credentials, ability, honesty, practises, etc, were called into question from the start. Given some of the questionable groups that have popped up in the past, I think it's perfectly reasonable for other rescues to have concerns. If the group is doing the right thing, they have nothing to worry about. As I said, no one should be above scrutiny- if you aren't willing to disclose how you operate (from the outset), people are going to make assumptions based on the information available. The way to prevent this is to be open from the start, especially where public donations are being requested and where dogs are leaving the pound undesexed.

Well, this bit, at least, feels familiar... This has already been said but.. you can't expect people to trust you when you react to simple questions with over-the-top threats of legal action. If you feel incorrect information has been posted, step in and answer any concerns in a civil manner. Simple as that. No rescue group is above questioning. An ethical group should be happy to answer questions without perceiving it to be an attack and personally, I'd be extremely wary of a group that made threats the way you did. Not a good look at all.

Longest I've been away (excluding being in hospital because the OH was still home with them) would be a week, about two years ago. Because we have foster dogs all the time, it's hard to plan anything. Our last holiday (which was the first in quite a while) ended up only being two nights away. I had someone reliable and expreienced with the hounds to feed them (and someone else to come over a few times a day to check on them) but I still spent the whole time worrying.

My old boy already has a really short name (Kiff) so instead gets called things like Snausage, Fatty-fat-fat-fat-fat or, when referring to him and the other dogs, "the goonhounds" (because their intelligence seems to drop with every greyhound added to the group). Sally was already named Sally when she came to us and even though I didn't like the name, I never got around to changing it. She gets called random nouns with "Sally" added to the start- "Sallycow", "Sallyhound", "Sallyboots", "Sallytardwhojustpukedgrassonmyshoe".

Sadly, Tralee appears to having continuing issues with those who disagree on any topic. And apparently turned yet another topic into a "look at moi" party. Getting back on topic.. Steve, they did actually say how many staff they employ and there's just no way dogs could be getting the care they need. They may well pass RSPCA inspection but is that an indication of quality? I doubt it. Guidelines need to reflect modern understanding of canine health and behaviour- Tasmanian laws relating to dogs are prehistoric, at best.

I had a greyhound actually blow coat this year (entire thing was gone in about two weeks, the yard looked like I'd blown up something white and fluffy). Never seen anything like it- I could pull out huge chunks of fur and underneath, lovely coat The weather has been all over the place though so.. maybe that had something to do with it.

Because BYBs are known for producing sound, health-tested dogs, right? :rolleyes: If you actually feel this site is a waste of time.. why exactly are you here? The only thing I can think of is to troll. Also.. for someone so bothered by "do gooder dog rescuers", you sure do spend a lot of time in the rescue section ;) I sure do saving worthy dogs. Not trying to save every impounded dog at any cost. Not all rescuers do that and most of the rescuers here are good people doing the hard work to help where they can. Nice to know what you think of their efforts though, my under-bridge dwelling chum ;)

Wheels are turning. Things are slow to change in Tasmania but with more education for consumers, people will become less accepting of these farms and less willing to get suckered in by them.

Because BYBs are known for producing sound, health-tested dogs, right? :rolleyes: If you actually feel this site is a waste of time.. why exactly are you here? The only thing I can think of is to troll. Also.. for someone so bothered by "do gooder dog rescuers", you sure do spend a lot of time in the rescue section ;)

Rebanne would probably settle for a website address or just some sort of proof that any of these dogs even exist and are of the lineage claimed. TFNs are pretty useless anyway, unless the ATO has started charging a tax on pretend dogs or something

Emma Haswell runs Brightside ( http://www.brightside.org.au/ website seems to be down at the moment though), who do rescues for not just companion animals but also farm animals. She's been in the news a lot over here recently because of puppy farm raids and the amount of ex breeders that Brightside has rescued, desexed and rehomed (from memory, they took in 180 puppy farm dogs last year). Emma does great work down here and as far as I know, Brightside are the only shelter that do puppy farm rescues in the state. The article is worded badly so I can see where there might be confusion. The Tasmanian Labradoodle people are the ones doing the puppy farming but speaking out against puppy farming. Of course :rolleyes: I'd be very interested to see if they'd let the general public in to look at where those dogs really live (because they sure as hell don't live in lovely rolling meadows, frolicking amongst the wild flowers). The article is completely biased, poorly written and not really news- unless you find irony to be newsworthy, I guess. Anyone who can breed 300+ puppies a year and sleep at night, in my opinion, is not a dog lover. At $2000 a pop, I think it's safe to assume they love something else (enough to compromise the welfare of animals). Some interesting maths, while I'm at it.. if they have 75 adult dogs and 300+ puppies a year, assuming each dog only gets one hour of human interaction per day.. just for the adults, that 27,375 hours a year. Running 6 staff to provide daily interaction, it'd take 12.5 hours a day for them (that's 12.5 hours per staff member, loooong day) to get through all the dogs, nevermind feeding and cleaning. And that's not counting puppy interaction (300+) and care. They "care" about their dogs? I don't see how, given they can't even care for them.

I wouldn't worry about it. You don't win Rescuer of the Year [however many times running] if you aren't doing something very right.