Maddy

I think I may have to have a lie down

You can say THAT again!! Are you for real? O.o

"We can't pin a "bad" breed on it so we'll make mention of the fact it was a scary colour."

The group could probably handle the bad publicity. Greyhounds already have misinformed reputations as being highly-strung, aggressive, nervy and they really don't need scientific "proof" that they're "timid" (or whatever word you want to use) dogs on top of that. Especially when the group selected to represent them are dogs more prone to temperament flaws owing to rearing methods. The reality is, there are some that might have issues because of improper socialisation but they don't represent what the breed should be like at all.

"Why Do Greyhounds Tend To Be Timid/sensitive?" Because if you're concerned about causing damage, changing the title to directly mention one breed (that is already struggling to overcome misconceptions) is a good idea?

Looks a bit like they're using the established brand "Flight Centre" to make themselves seem more reputable. One look at their website though and.. yeah, I wouldn't ship a pet rock through them. It looks very unprofessional. The website itself is registered through a third party so can't use that to verify anything (contact details, etc.) I'd be staying well away.

Agree with all of this. Our hounds are behind a second gate because otherwise, visitors can't get to the back door for the mob of excited greeters who seem to believe every visitor is for them :p And as far as being wary about hurting themselves.. if they were, my vet would see a lot less of me One current foster has almost injured himself horribly a few times. One involved galloping directly into a door frame (he'd been playing with a toy and was having a bit of a crazy run around). He turned his head at the last moment and just bruised up his shoulder but it could've been a lot worse if he'd hit it head-on. In my experience, their sense of self-preservation is a bit.. lacking.

Not sure why this is being posted five years after the episode first aired but.. whatever. I didn't see it as anything other than a bit of a piss-take. His methods are questionable and results.. well, even more questionable. I'm also not a fan of how his only excuse for aggression seems to be bad owners. In my opinion, this is creating a belief that dangerously aggressive dogs just need "exercise, discipline and.. [whatever the last thing was]", totally ignoring the fact that some dogs are dangerous and no amount of running them on a treadmill (or choking them with a leash) is going to fix that issue.

I have a mental, high-energy foster hound at the moment and honestly, I'd kill for one of those lazy, calm dogs that goes horizontal at any given opportunity. Manic might be fun to watch when you first meet a dog but it wears thin very quickly if you don't have the energy levels to keep up with the dog. Right now, Ru is doing crazy-pounces on his bed (jump on, try to kill the bed, run away again as if the bed is after him) while I'm still trying to get enough coffee in to function. Once the blood-caffeine levels are high enough, I need to go pick up all the things Ru got out during his nightly forage (which generally includes rubbish he's taken the liberty of "sorting" everywhere), clean up the stuffing from his bed/toy/undetermined source and once I've cleaned up after him, he has to be kept entertained because otherwise, he'll find his own entertainment (which would involve creating some kind of mess). Obvious though.. if you don't want to foster another greyhound, just.. don't foster one? I honestly don't see the point of coming here and saying things like "I don't mean to offend but.." and then proceeding to say some stuff that plenty of greyhound people would take offense to when just not fostering greyhounds would solve your problem nicely.

Must... not.... squeeee

One of my hounds does that, she's only interested in toys as long as there's a squeaker to remove. Once that's gone.. "Meh, gonna go rip stuffing out of one of the beds now kthnxbai" :rolleyes:

Not sure if she's still doing them but Huga did an awesome piece of one of my hounds.. http://www.freewebs.com/lovebirdanimalart/apps/photos/photo?photoid=45582129

I've seen one of those sorts of fights once in my life and I hope to god I never had to see one again. When the pack mentality kicks in, it's just brutal and no muzzle is going to make a difference. The victim (Blue, a very submissive, friendly little guy) suffered severe enough trauma to the area that the skin died, despite our vet doing an awesome job at patching his injuries back up. Blue was wearing a thick, double-layer wool coat at the time and in my opinion, that's the only reason he survived. So now, unless it's hot, my dogs wear coats (with the high neck) when out for walks. A coat certainly won't stop a fight but it'll at least protect some vital areas long enough for me to get a chance to react. Fairly unpleasant picture below. This was one of Blue's wounds, the skin was just destroyed (the white thing is a drain) and in the end, the dead skin had to be just cut off. The other dog also tore his chest open between his front legs (the third dog was mostly just jumping in and biting at anything she could grab on Blue so those injuries were minor scratches). The third dog involved was actually my own FF, Sally- a usually submissive, quiet girl who'd scurry away at the first sign of anyone getting snarky. Although obviously, on that occasion, something kicked in. A lot of people like to think they know their dogs inside-out but the reality is.. sometimes, they do things you'd never expect. If more people would acknowledge that fact, dog parks might be safer places.

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've had muzzled dogs fight and they've still managed to cause bite injuries (if they press their faces in hard enough, they can grab through the wire or plastic) so even with a muzzle on, the outcome (in my experience, anyway) depends on the type of fight and you still can't feel secure that no one will walk away uninjured. Regarding walking muzzled greyhounds in public.. I think the issue is a little more complex than the dog simply being unable to defend itself. Some people see a muzzled dog, assume it's been made totally safe and so let their dogs run rampant. I think I may have actually mentioned before the owner of the staffy x JRT who was letting her dog mount my dog ( while I was trying to get some distance between it and Kiff). If Kiff had been unmuzzled.. I have a feeling that owner wouldn't have been quite so careless

Its been tested several times and contract law says you cant make someone promise something into the future once its their own property and you cannot put punishments on if they breach into the future because its no longer your property - basic contract law. What about rights of first refusal? That involves a transfer of property and I far as I know, can be enforced.

Oh, yes. One of my own greyhounds is an epic drama queen and I have to take him to the vet to have his nails done I teach new adopters how to cut nails without the greyhound pity party and yet I can't cut my own dog's nails (the last time we tried, he jerked his paw just as I was about to cut- blood everywhere, screaming, the neighbours must have thought I was killing him.

Very true. I'll admit I stopped reading at that analogy because frankly, I think it's pretty disgusting to compare the two.

I have one of those dogs and honestly, it's never been an issue. She has zoomie time in the larger front yard, she gets interaction with dogs I know she can get along with (other greyhounds, although she also had an ACD friend for a while) and we find other ways to have fun and exercise. It's obviously different to my other dog but Sally's dog aggression (and extremely high prey drive) doesn't impact at all on my enjoyment of owning her or her quality of life. Besides the easily managable DA issue, she's a sweet, lovely girl and we've never been the cause of a fight or any injury whatsoever to another dog. DA dogs can be managed and can live great lives with responsible owners. The obvious disclaimer.. I'd never rehome a DA dog but that is not because I don't believe they can still be good pets, rather, you cannot guarantee they will end up with a responsible owner.

I've written and deleted a few things here but nothing seemed to quite sound right (or Troy-safe). The Cliff Notes.. Your wording is inflammatory and you make use of scare words that really have nothing to do with the issue- "drug dealers", for example. Your "research" could do with a little improvement and to me, your post sounds very short-sighted and misinformed. As far as breed appeal goes.. I guess that's a very individual thing. It's entirely beyond me why anyone could possibly want to own a GR. I'd take a horde of staffies before even considering something with the temperament of a GR but that's me. I have no problem with people discussing breed preferences, I just think it's shitty to kick a breed when it's down because it happens to be one you'd never want to own.

30% of vegan pet food retailers fabricate statistics because hey, who's gonna check those numbers?

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=derp

Definitely agree there. For the size I got, there was a price difference of about $50 between Ebay and most the pet shops I checked here.

Edit.. Turns out this was a derp thread, probably. Re-edited to add.. It was sort of still Wednesday when I wrote it so that's my excuse. Re-re-edited to add.. This can probably be deleted >.>

I use a Furminator on my greyhounds and I found it to actually be better than the Zoom Groom (which I'd been using ever since I got a greyhound). It picks up dandruff really well so it's good for the lamington hounds I seem to get and it definitely gets a lot more hair than the Zoom Groom. I save the Zoom Groom for bathing as it is good for massaging in shampoos or coat oils. I guess I'd probably recommend getting both :p

I have four dogs and I'd have a problem with people having their dogs in a place that serves food. My parents were around when Tasmania was having some pretty horrible outbreaks of hytadids so we were raised to be very cautious about dogs and hygiene. There is nothing that grosses me out more than walking past a cafe and seeing some fluffy, little dog parked at a table, the fur around its hind legs and tail obviously soiled. Down here, we're fairly safe (last outbreak was 2006) but obviously for the mainland, you have something to worry about (probably made worse by the fact it's perfectly legal to feed dogs raw offal there). I wouldn't eat around my own dogs (who are all wormed every second month and never given raw offal) so I sure as hell wouldn't want to eat near a stranger's dog on the mainland.