Jumabaar

I have a bell set up that I trained my young dogs on, but one of my older girls just vaguely wanders into the room and looks at you then wonders back out. I now recognise it, but it did make toilet training a very long process because I didn't realise that was her 'sign'.

Good luck with your litter. I wish it were possible to duel register dogs- it would probably get me back into herding and show a few people that smart dogs can be pretty and pretty dogs can get a little muddy too!!

Do you mean World Kennel Club? I had never even heard of them before lol. WKC automatically means Working Kelpie Council to me. Since this has diverted OT (off topic) to a discussion about Different Registries for the Australian Kelpie, using terms such as the WKC, ANKC, AKC, etc (etcetera) makes sense to me?? Not sure what your talking about.... Even google recognises WKC as Working Kelpie Council as its top hit!! Often abbreviations must be put in context. Its a forum- if you don't know what something means ask or google without the extra snobbery

Clarification http://www.wkc.org.au/WKC-ByLaws.php subset 12.6

You would need to start off with dual registered dogs as the ANKC stud book is closed registry- I don't know if the WKC will register ANKC kelpies. I do not know if any overseas kennel clubs recognise WKC dogs and admit them to their registry like they do with the ISDS (International Sheepdog Society) for border collies. The dual registered BCs in this country have been imported or are offspring of imported dogs. Some loopholes have been closed (not sure if ANKC can still gain WKC registration, and it means already having access to some duel registered stock- which means a fair amount of compromise IMO because there is such a limited gene pool). This is all written in the WKC rules. but apparently a new loophole has accidentally been created overseas. But even then it would take a fair few generations of breeding O/S to bring anything back duel registered. (but this has been worked out through translation and so it is third hand information)

Even if they did there would not be much point. Show training is about learning to show a particular breed and your particular dog to its best advantage. All the information they would give you on grooming, gaiting, stacking etc is breed specific and specific to your dog. I think doing a little training with a mutt could help. Just understanding how moving around can change shape etc- it will still be a big learning curve with a show dog but it might give them a better chance/understanding of training their pup... (having been someone that stuffed their first dog up and had to do a lot of unlearning)

I disagree. Kelpies are better suited to owners who will provide them with mental stimulation and plenty of exercise. Just because a dog lives on land it doesn't mean it will be provided with all it needs. These dogs are rehomed from land all the time due to being bored and wandering off their property. I do agree though, that certain breeds are better off with more experienced owners, it's common sense really. Couldn't agree more with Clyde. Please do not try and tell my Princess Saf Saf that she belongs on acreage- she belongs on a bed, preferably with a boomerang pillow and a human slave to rub her tummy!! Outside is for going to the loo only!! She has Kelpie on her papers but that doesn't automatically mean she has a desire to run all day. She would much prefer cuddles. Each dog needs to be assessed as an individual. We can generalise as much as we want but there are soooo many variations on personality its not funny. How do people get matched up with dogs that don't suit them?? That might be a better place to look than generalise about a breed.

I know- its just that stories like this can absolutely freak people out, even if their dogs are vaccinated. It would just have been nice for them to have said 7 unvaccinated dogs dead in one street....

The article linked earlier did not actually have a control of just natural mating to compare the results to. And since the natural mating increased litter size in both circumstances it may have been interesting to see just how much value add the AI gave. It doesn't indicate if the number of AI would have impacted on the results, and some of the sample sizes are rather small. It is not (as far as I can see) a study of AI vs Natural mating, it is a study about the different forms of AI so tells you nothing about the advantage from doing a number of natural matings or doing a natural mating and an AI. I would also aim just for a natural mating or two. I got 5 pups from a fresh Vaginal AI, and 8 pups from 2 natural matings....

7 dogs on one street all unvaccinated?? I would want to be doing more investigation here!! Could it be a new strain that the vaccine is not protecting against? Could it not be parvo? Could they have been owned by the same family (and thus all unvaccinated)? Could they have all been related and had an immune dysfunction that made them more susceptible?? I know Parvo is out there but that news story seems strange to me.

Half my dogs have access to the front of the house (the ones who are trusted to just snooze and not destroy anything), the other half have access to the back half. The back yard has a small fence + nosey neighbour so no outside access unless I am home until thats sorted. They would all prefer to be in the house- the Kelpies in particular see outside as a toilet and a morning and evening zoomie track and thats about it. I would eventually like a doggie door but even with an 8ft fence the neighbour still has a stool to say hello to the other neighbours that have put up high fencing!! My Finnish Lapphund is crated if the back part of the house isn't SPOTLESS because she will knock stuff around and destroy one item. Mind you the ends of the crate (not the doors) are cable tied as she 'lets herself out'. But that is if we are going out for less than three hrs. Anything longer and I just suck it up and do the cleaning required to have her free.

Its great fun. Just wish I weren't such a dill and making sooooo many bloody mistakes- my poor dog is so handler impaired it isn't funny. I can't wait for the signs so I can start practicing them (without the dog since she can do them all fine) mind you my biggest errors have been turning right instead of left and not being able to count properly not sure if practice can help with that!

Plenty of space to set up! I am 20minutes south of the grounds and it is bucketing down atm. But it won't stop me tomorrow, even with my fluffy!! I haven't had a show in aaaages!!

My dogs get an egg or two per week. I crack them into the bowl and the whole lot is eaten. No preparation and the whole lot is finished very quickly. (I am also very popular during baking as the dogs get the shells then too and I have 6 waiting pleading for a bit of shell!!) It is the ratio with phosphorus that is important, but I aim for a balance over a week or two, rather than trying to balance each and every meal and if you feed raw meat you should be fine. You certainly won't go wrong with an occasional egg. Just remember if you feed the insides of the egg to feed the whole egg not just the yolk. The body is pretty good at regulating slight irregularities, particularly with how much they will absorb from food :) If you feed raw meat without bone, then you will need the added calcium as the calcium/phosperous ratio will be out. If you feed raw then you can adjust the about of meat and bone to allow for the additional calcium of the diet in the form of eggs. (As opposed to just feeding kibble where adding eggs would throw out the balance ;) )

This is the confusing part. How do you decide when or whether to re-vaccinate the dog if the titer results come back insufficient 12 months or 3 years down the track? Your question is also what I'm confused about This is why it is best if the Titre is done at about 2 weeks after vaccination. Because during that time, bloods would still show the antibodies created in response to the vaccine introduced disease/s. This means sero-conversion has occurred - the body has developed a recognition of the diseases. If no anti-bodies were present at that time, I'd be concerned sero-conversion had not occurred (ie the body did not respond to the vaccine and that my dog's body was not as properly prepared to send anti-bodies to the rescue should contact with the disease/s occur). If you Titre test beyond two weeks, perhaps the test will show negative, but that is not proof that sero-conversion has not taken place. It's always pleasing when the titre shows anti-bodies, but that doesn't necessarily mean the anti-bodies are present just because of the vaccine - it might be that the dog has been exposed to the diseases, so the anti-bodies have revved into action as a means to fighting off the diseases before they take hold. I trust what I have read (Dr Jean Dodds articles are very helpful, along with posts by forum members Staranais and Rappie [Vets], amongst others) and been advised and that if my dog was exposed to any of the said diseases, antibodies to the diseases would be readily re-created and released into the blood stream to attack the diseases. I think that if I lived in an area where the diseases were rampant, perhaps I might re-vaccinate if the titre showed no antibodies (which would indicate my dog had not been exposed to the diseases in more recent times and consequently exist in cell-memory, not immediately in the blood stream) but that's something I would and will decide when and if the time comes (which I hope it doesn't). But when and if I need to make that decision, I will also take into account the current health status of my dog and determine the greater risk chance : (a) that my dog's system will suffer as a result of the vaccine chemicals being introduced to his body or (b) that my dog will pick up one of the 3 core diseases. I am not as concerned about canine cough - not to suggest the condition should be disregarded if it is contracted. I'm not a Vet but this is how I understand it. Thank you for the info Erny. It would be much easier if vets were all on the same page regarding this. The majority (mine included) seem to recommend yearly titers and revacc if antibody levels are 'too low' (not non-existent). But re-vaccinating may well be unnecessary, even if the dog is showing low levels? The only way to show that a dog has immunity if the levels drop is to challenge them with the disease to see how their memory cells react. I have read articles where they indicate that dogs with a negative titre have been challenge tested with the disease and have shown they don't have immunity to the dz. What I can't work out if these dogs are ones that have were checked to ensure seroconverted and have since lost their immunity or if they are dogs that failed to seroconvert in the first place? I have looked around but don't have access to the university library for another month to be able to see recent articles to answer my own question!! Happy to have it answered by others though. This is why vets err on the safe side and revaccinate if titre levels are low. This is what is advised in these guidelines http://www.aahanet.org/publicdocuments/vaccineguidelines06revised.pdf on page 13. I need titres to allow my dogs to do sports so its not something I have really thought about and they have all come back with high levels. I think if they came back low I would have a good long talk with my vet because they are regularly in challenging environments (I expect them to be in contact with the diseases) so would want to explore it further before making a decision one way or another.

But Maremma are under-represented in the show ring so there is less to compare. The show quality is improving. At least I hope it is so lets not go there. But my two dogs are titled and justifiably so. I don't want to sound arrogant but which one of their pups was not show or breeding quality? What I will say is that dogs were chosen for show and breed homes because they were superior to the others. But that means they were an improvement on their parents not that the others were inferior to their parents. All worthy of the main register. Lets face it we're not talking hundreds even dozens of dogs here. I don't want to sound rude, but in the interest of our objectives - To Improve the Breed - If you are producing dogs that obviously have to go on the Limited Register then -- hello !!!! Some difference I would have thought. Regards Px Just on that point. It doesn't matter if there is one dog in the ring or 20 they should be being compared to the standard not each other. If individuals put pups that did not conform well to the standard on the limited register, instead of just comparing them to their own sire/dam perhaps the time taken for amazing examples to hit the ring would take a little less time.... That all being said, I think depending on GENETICS it may be necessary for more than the best pups to be bred from to preserve genetic diversity and to maintain certain features. But this works in reverse, some pups should be desexed if they are even slightly less than perfect because there genes are over represented in the population. Improving on the sire and dam is a personal achievement but I will point out that I have seen in the ring an entire litter. They were ALL an improvement on the Dam but only two deserved to be in the ring. Improving on crap can still leave you slightly less crappy crap......

I think I read somewhere that there's an amino acid imbalance in egg whites, and you shouldn't feed dogs whites without yolk . . . but yolk without white is ok. As for whole eggs, I'd pay attention if eggs were more than 10 or 20% of the dog's diet . . . but if they're a side dish to a main meal, I wouldn't worry. Nor would I panic if my dogs occasionally got an egg white without yolk. It's not poison, just not well balanced. Egg white has thiamine binding molecules, so feeding to much egg white only results in a thiamine deficiency. Egg yolks are rich in thiamine so prevent any deficiency caused by the egg white. So feeding whole eggs or egg yolks is fine in moderation, but only feeding egg whites causes problems.

Yeah and you know they don't have to run health checks beyond that for wild canid breeding programs either. It's just there is a much greater chance of undesirable genes propping up when the animals are closely related, not to mention if they are not being bred to increase their health/well-being/ability to perform normal canine functions (but rather for looks and supposed adherence to standards that as Sandgrubber rightly stated, were written long before we knew anything about genetics). You can pay much more than $1200 for a cavalier and still end up with a sick dog - plenty of people do. There are lots of advantages to purebreds because you do have a much better idea of what you are getting. But when you start inbreeding and breeding for extreme traits and consequently negate the benefits of evolution and sexual reproduction - these are terrible things in nature that most species actively avoid (including our own), you need to fall back on science and spend mega bucks on testing just to try and combat some of the potential consequences. My problem was caused by a RANDOM GENETIC MUTATION not inbreeding or breeding for extremes. It could happen even in wild canid populations or to a BYB. The difference between BYB is I got all the pups diagnosed and tested and will be ensuring it goes no further in my lines. But I guess putting down pups, or sending pups to homes without answers is ok in mutts because they dong get sick....

I never expected to see such a controversial statement on this board. However, you express my views perfectly. Yes +1! You have my breed down pat as far as i am concerned :laugh: Apart from a few select breeders who dare to stay true to the standard the only place you find a decent dog these days is "byb". Its funny the range of practices here that are considered byb. So you can health test, be registered with ANKC but if the litter aint reg you are still a byb? :laugh: I would take that any day over all these puppy farms that are being discovered First "byb good for nothing mongrel" shepherd died of old age at 15. Damn her non registered breeders for selling us a healthy and long lived family member :rolleyes: I really don't understand this point of view. The problem is that there are not just "a few" people doing this. It is rife. The fact is BYB will never stop. I don't think anyone disputes that but make it more socially unacceptable and minimise it as much as possible. I only have mutts, probably always will but I sure as hell would not be lining the pockets of a BYB or puppy farm for them and I certainly don't think anyone should be worried about a shortage of BYB mutts anytime soon. I agree, there are alot of byb, i only know a handful of doggy friends who have actually bought from registered breeders. The rest have been purchased from the pound or unregisetered, hence byb dogs. I guess for me personally, it is more the fact that i have had bad experiences with club with my breed and don't agree with what most reg breeders in my breed are doing. hence i find a breeder who still does health tests ect but does not show hence they are unregisted. This is how i find a dog that i believe is true to my breed. You see the thing is, i think public perception must change for byb to be seen by many as socially unacceptable. The attitude of most ppl i know is that pedigree dogs are overpriced and when you only want the dog as a family pet and not showing/breeding then the papers are not worth much to these ppl. I think it is also still a common point of view(dispite the good efforts of breeders) that the more pedigreed a dog is the more health problems they may have. So when they can pay in some cases $1000 dollars less they will, as many simply cannot afford 1500+ for the breed they want. I am not saying this is personally what i think, it is the thinking tho of my little group at our daily hangout :laugh: Just curious, if you have mutts where did they come from? The pound? Where did they come from before that? Most reg breeders will not breed mutts. Edit: To say, very sorry, thought you were replying to me. So sorry if you were not as you got my opinion instead :laugh: I agree to this.. I had a friend posting on facebook about looking for breeders of particular breeds.. she then said later on in comments oh I cant afford $1500+ theres a "breeder" at ----- who sells them for $550.. Breeder my ass, I linked her to here explaining the difference between her "breeder" and a real breeder, she found one she likes but I have a feeling she will go back to the cheap one simply because its cheap... Lets face it there really is NO money in breeding dogs at all and yet breeders seem to charge a phenominmal amount for a dog.. mostly to me it comes across as making a profit but correct me if Im wrong.. but what are we looking at cost wise if your bitch has a healthy pregnancy - food, worming, vaccine, microchip if you add that all up and divde by the number of pups surely even if you say added $100 each for your time if doesnt work out at $1200 a pup .. Just my thoughts but as I said correct me if Im wrong, I havent bred a litter before and Im only new to the show world so Im learning alot as I go Im all for purebreds and showline and everything.. Im looking into finally getting my own show puppy but I would say thats the thing that bogs me down the most is the cost of the dog.. You get what you pay for and thats fine... but the average family mum,dad and a few kids I dont think can understand why they pay that money when as pointed out they can go to a petshop or local newspaper or whatever and pay next to nix for a pup of quiet possibly the same kinda quality as a pedigreed purebred... I dunno just my thoughts here.. My last litter would have seen almost 10k to finally get an answer on why the males in the litter got sick- ended up with blood going to the states!! People didn't even want to pay $800 for them. I started with 8 and ended up with 5 so each pup would have cost 2k to produce. Even if I try to even out over a few litters I won't be up any money on breeding for a long long time...... It only takes one disaster to remove any 'profit' if your breeding for the right reasons.... Most of the pups in papers sell for $400 unvaccinated, unmicrochipped, unwormed. So people get their cheap pup and spend $200 on their first visit, another $150 at their next. So $750 spent on the cheap pup anyway.. Mine would have been sold fully microchipped, wormed, AND fully vaccinated and I provided food for two weeks etc......

Just putting it out there- perhaps you need to put a long line on him to teach him that he can go in front of you?? Franky will toilet better if a stranger holds her lead or if she is off lead when I go out, compared to me holding the lead.

My Kelpie is doing the same thing. Although she does give in and pee after 8hrs I have taken to making a big fuss of her at home when she toilets there. Which has meant she now expects that attention when we go out- and I give it to her. I usually give her treats for toileting when we are out and its generally the biggest event for the day. She has SLOWLY got to the point where toileting is seen as a positive when we go out and she managed to pee within an hour of going away last week. Her sister...... She still waits till she is about to burst before she gives in. (their mother marks constantly when we go out so its all new to me) I would love to know an easier remedy- cuing has not worked for her. I know of other dogs that do hold on for 2 days at a time

Gribbles pathology: http://www.gribblesvets.com/info/general/Home/get/0/0/ From my (limited) understanding if the bloods go directly to Vetpath in WA (rather than through Gribbles) the cost is much lower. However the vet must have an account with Vetpath to do so. I believe that the Hepatitis test needs to be sent o/s regardless. Either UK or Jean Dodds in USA. I didn't get the Hep done I think. The vet said if one was positive (can't remember which) that it meant that Hep would be positive. She is in contact with Jean Dodds all the time so I am happy to go with what she says. Just out of interest you could ring Barbra (my vet)- I think she still does phone consults through her practice http://www.naturalvet.com.au/ if you do get a low titre.... She is very up to date with all the latest research and will actively go and ferret the information out if you need her too. Expensive but if your thinking of revaccinating it may be less expensive to have a chat to her first....

Rehome just is not an option so you may as well take that off the list. Imagine if the dog managed to somehow escape and hurt someone else's child?? Your friend would feel even worse! A behaviourist can really make a difference to some dogs!! And if it doesn't work it will help with closure for the entire family. Not every animal can be fixed but if they have the resources and commitment then there is defiantly no reason why they shouldn't try.

Depends on the dog! My girl is really high energy (I recently decided on the phrase 'hummingbird in a dog suit' describes her best) and a quick jog and sniff around helps get some of the 'silly' out of her so she can focus better. I've learnt it's no good starting with weaves, for example, because after being home all day she really wants to stretch her legs on the jumps and tunnels before she does more precise work or tries to learn something new (we're still starting out on weaves). It's a balancing act of course, because being too puffed means she can't learn well either. Edit: I also think getting a chance to explore and sniff around the grounds first makes the environment less of a distraction, because then it's 'been there, done that' for the rest of the evening. I understand what you mean. I used to take the edge off Abby because she would be soooo full on that she would throw herself into everything and end up trying to do 10 things at once and none of them amazing. She always did amazing toward the end of a session when she had lost her excess energy. I was someone that the trainers always said should exercise their dog before a session, but after I found two hours of bike riding didn't work I gave up and just went to training with a mental dog. I do agree that this is because I had not managed to harness her drive. At the same time, even after harnessing her drive (to the best of my ability at the time) I know that her first 'set' of anything will not be as neat and tidy as her second 'set'. This is flyball or Rally and in the past agility. So although I work her (after a quick toilet stop) from the beginning I am prepared that for her she does need some settling time to go her best work. Not sure if further training could have fixed that but its easy to work around. He focus and drive is no different between the two sessions, she just seems to process things better once her brain is warmed up a little. She seems to waste less energy after we have got our first session out of the way I havent noticed it as much in my other dogs, but I do think its there on a much much smaller scale. Since I am the common trainer in this case I can't say if its a kelpie thing or a trainer thing. They remains crated unless I can focus on them because I want to always give them 100% so that I can always ask for 100%.

I personally wouldn't titre test for a few years- but it will depend what you do with your dog. Obedience clubs will probably want more regular titres for example.