Steve

My guess she was honest yesterday. Bear in mind her website is designed to cater to her 'market' - of course you tell fibs when marketing something ;) MMM Maybe she means here we as in the royal we so they bred them but she personally doesnt - maybe? http://www.family-pets.com/backcross.htm Kate's Family Pets <H2 align=left>Backcross Labradoodles</H2> These puppies are bred by crossing a first cross miniature Labradoodle with an unrelated Poodle. The first cross Labradoodle mothers are bred from Miniature Poodles and these girls are usually crossed with a Standard X Toy Poodle male so in effect there are four different breeds in the mix. This maximises heterosis while at the same time maintaining the poodle influence on the coat. Backcross puppies rarely shed hair and if they do shed it is only slight shedding. Their coats can be quite poodle like, long curly and soft as puppies becoming coarser as they grow older. Some pups have shorter fine shaggy coats. The woollier dogs usually need clipping although some have been kept long with regular monthly visits to the groomer and a bit of judicious trimming around the eyes and the bottom. We breed these dogs for people who would like a dog with more certainty in their coat type. They do usually look more poodle like than the first cross dogs but if their coat is clipped evenly they will not be mistaken for poodles. They are usually knee high dogs similar in size to the Miniature Labradoodles only with a lighter frame. Occasionally we join back to Mini or Toy Poodles in which case they will grow into small dogs – no larger than a beagle.

The presenter does not breed beyond a first cross. Where does she locate her pedigreed dogs? She spoke of her desire for purebred breeders to be more receptive to selling her their dogs.She felt she would be able to offer us feedback on how our dogs went in the breeding department and what they were producing. ;) :p She did say that she had never bred past a first cross but on her website she speaks about how she is breeding on in the hope she can reduce shedding and has photos and descropitions of them. So either she told fibs yesterday or I misunderstood what she said or she tells fibs on her website.

I definitely agree with them on one huge point. Its time we got funding going and did some serious research on dogs as companions. Its time we stopped making assumptions about how dogs think and feel based on how we think and feel. Just take one simple issue - Where should dogs which are used for breeding be housed. The guidelines in our companion animal's state codes are specific about concrete floors, minimum sizes and a whole load of other stuff. The RSPCA want the same - I saw another article in Dogs life this month interviewing an RSPCA inspector about how terrible it is to keep breeding dogs in a yard type setting.The puppy farmers paper speaks about how yards are no good and they want them on concrete. I know when the state laws came in down Victoria way originally the breeders were very upset about how they were expected to house their breeding dogs.They tell them how many can live together and they have to be separated and sleep on their own etc - that would be helll for my beagles I reckon having to have my breeding dogs living on concrete all their lives would be awful but if I am to comply with current laws and guidelines in NSW thats exactly what I have to do. Kate stated she wants her breeding dogs in yard type pens but thats isnt condusive to fitting in with the NSW guidelines. Peter Cornford from Freedom kennels wanted his dogs to be living on dirt and being able to dig holes and live like dogs too.He was a puppy farmer so how could he know what he was talking about.? Im not interested in whats easiest to clean or how much it costs or who thinks one way or another is better .I want real studies done which show conclusively which way is best and if what I think is best - getting to run and play and dig and sunbake on the grass no matter how many dogs someone owns then our laws and regs should be amended to allow us to know whats best not assume whats best and do something about it to ensure the dogs dont suffer and live their best lives. Theres dozens of things I want tested and research and clarified and until they do it nothing any of us say no matter how much experience we have will mean anything and in the mean time everyone is an expert and no one is proven right or wrong and dogs suffer. So if a commercial breeder and a hobby breeder have to communicate and share thoughts to get it done and push for some things together - then lets do it. This isnt supposed to be about egos - its about whats best for our dogs and we dont know that until its tested.

Last but by no means least was Mia Cobb. This was the one that grabbed my interest the most and it was about testing how stresssed dogs are when they go from a home to a kennel situation. Obviously the focus for this research was on what happens to guide dog candidates which have been in homes with puppy raisers and then have to come back to a kennel situation for their training etc but I could see it used for a much wider use. I would love to be able to follow this up a bit with Mia because the testing process and what comes out of that would be good to look at with several other start points so we could look at stress levels in kennelled breeding dogs over breeding dogs kept in a backyard type setting- maybe the difference in samples taken from one dog in both situations or a lot of dogs in both situations. I also have a bunch of questions regarding the kennel set up of the guidedogs and time frames for when they are in certain areas and interacting with staff and other dogs etc. One of these days Id like to catch up with Mia and sort of dig around in the topic a bit more. Well done Mia.

Lisa Tomkins had the most awesome stuff to show us about right and left handed dogs and spoke to us about the correlation of one or the other being more suited to guide dog work. It was a good presentation and it will definitely help out those responsible for selecting candidates for the guide dog program. Too bad we didnt have heaps more time to see the other tests she is using to make assessments. Great stuff!

Vanessa spoke about ways we might be able to increase the ratio of people who are responsible pet owners by sorting out what responsible pet owners might have in common. This was really interesting because one of the things which had been identified was the impact of the perception that they were being approved of by their friends and family.Thats pretty exciting because I think we can use that in marketing and campaigns. It probably also means that what we thought was almost insurmountable - thats is - how on earth are we ever going to educate people- to we only have to educate some of the people because people will repsonde well to peer pressure when it comes to doing the right thing by their dogs. I would have liked to explore these results a bit more too and the whole subject gave us heaps of food for thought. You will see us playing around with a bit of this in the not too distant future. It was great! In my case my family and friends think Im a nut and I certainly dont do anything with my dogs with the expectation that my friends and family approve of me. Very interesting. Edited for spelling Im getting worse. - Tired.

Kate Mornement gave usa presentation on the results of her questionaire regarding community attitudes toward shelter dogs. She did a good job too . I would have liked to see this one with a much wider collection net because Im not convinced that the results were indicative of the wider population I would have liked to have a chat with her over a cuppa to see what she felt about a couple of things. I think the results would change pretty radically depending on the group you were surveying so in order to get a clear view you would need to catch all groups and I dont think this one did that. Not that I think Kate could have anticipated that but it did seem that most of the respondents were already pretty primed toward shelter dogs.If there's any follow up studies to do we would be happy to help spread the word and perhaps bring in a more diverse group of respondents and allow a bigger sample. I have to say that it makes no sense to me that people sook about their dogs escaping like as if its the dog's fault.

I notice theres a new one since last time I looked. [number 20] Code of Ethics Membership Requirements 1. Members shall read and understand the Australian Association of Pet Dog Breeders Standards and shall agree to abide by these standards. 2. Members shall read and understand the relevant local state codes or legislation (see links on AAPDB web site). Where these practices might conflict with Australian Association of Pet Dog Breeders standards State codes will apply – unless the codes reduce the level of care and responsibility required by breeders – in which case AAPDB standards will apply. 3. Associate Members shall allow their property to be inspected by a person nominated by the AAPDB Board prior to being admitted as full members. Members shall allow their property to be inspected every 2-3 years. Husbandry requirements 4. Members shall ensure that their dogs are under effective and complete control at all times. 5. Members shall feed their animals a balanced diet appropriate to their life stage. 6. Members shall keep their animals appropriately vaccinated, groomed and free from internal and external parasites and shall seek veterinary attention promptly for animals showing signs of illness. 7. Members shall not house their animals in cages for any reason other than transport, breeding or treatment of illnesses. 8. Members shall not house dogs permanently in individual pens. Animals should spend most of their life in communal runs as described in the AAPDB standards. 9. Members shall not euthanase retired breeding dogs simply because they have been retired. Retired dogs must be desexed, and rehomed or kept as pets. Euthanasia may only be performed by a qualified veterinarian in the case of: a. intractable behavioural problems that preclude dogs from being used for breeding or rehomed as pets b. Painful or life threatening health problems that detract from the animal’s expectation of experiencing reasonable quality of life 10. Members should ensure that puppies are vaccinated, free from internal and external parasites and that they are appropriately socialised as outlined in the AAPDB Standards Sale of puppies 11. Members should rehome their puppies at 8 weeks of age after vaccination at 6 weeks. Members shall never rehome a puppy younger than 7 weeks of age 12. Members should rehome their puppies either a. Desexed 2 weeks prior to rehoming b. With a $50.00 desexing voucher refundable on proof of desexing c. To a pet store that offers a desexing voucher with all pups sold. 13. Sale of puppies to pet stores who have agreed to accept the post sale obligations outlined below, and offer desexing vouchers with all puppies, are endorsed by the AAPDB. 14. Members shall not sell puppies to children under the age of 18 and shall not sell puppies at shows or markets. 15. Members shall accurately describe the breeding of the puppies they sell as outlined in the AAPDB Breeding terminology and discussion Post sale obligations 16. Members shall offer a 3 day “cooling off” period after private sale of a puppy during which time the pup can be returned and the purchase price refunded, excluding any non-refundable deposit paid. 17. Members shall be responsible for reasonable veterinary expenses up to the purchase price of the puppy for illnesses present at the time of sale of a puppy. 18. Members shall provide new owners with information regarding feeding, veterinary care and training of their puppies. 19. Members must provide clear details of if and when refunds will be offered. If members do offer refunds they shall not require the return of the dog for these refunds to be paid. 20. Members shall undertake to take back and rehome any dog they have bred at any stage in the animal’s life should it become homeless for any reason. The only exception to this is when selling to AAPDB approved pet stores where this duty of care is transferred with the sale of the puppy. http://www.aapdb.com/AboutUs/AAPDBEthics.aspx

Yes she did - as the breeder would have a life-long commitment to pups born (tho there was the murky area re pet shops). She also had guidelines about how dogs were kept. Basically home backyard type situations where there was a limit on the number of dogs (was it 2 or 3 bitches?). If you wanted more than that then you needed multiple backyard type areas, so dogs could live in their own groups. No cages allowed. Pens to only be used for temporary containment. Daily contact and handling of pups by humans. She also had her own views on number of litters. She was OK about breeding back to back but the limit should be "7 litters or 7 years of age" and then desexing and retirement to a pet home. What do breeders think of this? It was 4 kept together and I dont remember her saying she tested but given she is a vet Im assuming her level of testing and access to it all that she would. I have the code of conduct here somewhere Ill see if I can dig it out.

Perhaps the point everyone is missing in this discussion about Tammie's research, is that the 200 dogs she is "testing" aren't 'tests' at all! It is data collection. jdavis the test IS a strange situation test. The dog is taken onlead into an enclosure and the exact same thing happens for each dog being 'tested'. The dog is video recorded from four different angles. Different dogs will obviously behave differently, but there is a finite number of behaviours that will be shown. This is why she needs as many different dogs as possible. I'm taking my 2 in a couple of week. I will be making bets with her (if she'll take the bet) that I can predict how both dogs will behave. And steve - thanks for the great post. Your summary is spot on. As to LIDA - he was jogged at the end again about how they should note the source of the dogs (registered breeder or other). Do you think he took it on board any more than previously? Or did he look nagged at? :D He had already been given a heads up because I had discussed this with Jade Norris [ RSPCA Science Officer abount 3 weeks ago] She came back and told me they didnt think it would be an issue because the sampling would be so wide it would all sort itself out. Thats why I went after the stats - 630,000 puppies bred each year in Australia and only 69,000 are ours. I told Jade I didnt hold any hope thatbased on these figures the data would represent in anyway anything which would help us in knowing what our dogs had as issues and not all other dogs which happened to look like it might be purebred. About now Id like to say that when those photos of Kates cross bred beagles came up I couldn't see any difference in them and a purebred beagle .I may have if Id had more time to study them but no vet would pick those dogs as a cross and they would be listed as purebred beagles. Anyway - back to the question. Im pretty confident he was ready for me. It was a good answer but when Lesley and I spoke with him later - and to be fair he may have been distracted he didnt make me feel that it was something that he was intending to rectify too quickly. Im saying until he does - dont give him any money and beat our chests and bang and clang until he does. When he does give him all the money we can find and do all we can to help him. I have some ideas which would help him out with this so we can get this data and not have to worry about anyone other than the breeder identifying the breed, we wont need a phd student to be involved and it would solve a bunch of other stuff too which is one reason why we could all just talk and talk and talk - but. We will publish what we think is a great solution to many of the issues raised on the day when we respond to the RSPCA puppy farm paper.

I thought Tammie's research was a good start point to measure amicability. If its posible to get to a point where certain behaviour characteristics can be tested for then thats a good thing and whether we use that or not in our breeding rpograms will be based on what we are selecting for at the time of planning our litters. I think you need to be a bit fair about this and look at a larger picture. For example Ive been breeding beagles for a very long time and the way I sort out the young pups which are most likley to be a pain in the neck for their owners are to watch them at around 6 to 8 weeks of age. The ones which according to my records and my limited research which will be more of a handful are the ones who literally head butt a concrete pole while they are exploring scents because they are so intent of going after the trail that they dont see the post coming. Ive seen beagle pups almost knock themselves out in their pursuit of the scent.These days I deliberately test them for that and it impacts on what sort of home I send them to. Ive found this drive which I witness at such a young age is a good indication of how driven the dog will be as it gets older. When I first noticed some of them do this and others dont it was not given much attention but as I got older and wiser and started to correlate the ones which had good noses as adults with this young behaviour its part of what I do now as a matter of necessity and its always right. Because I've chosen mainly dogs which dont head butt posts to keep and breed with less puppies head but poles now than they used to. O.K. Its not your usual puppy test but I found the puppy test which were around dint work for my breeds anyway so sort of by accident Ive developed my own for my breeds. Granted its not very scientific but it's my way of measuring potential behaviours. So if we can work through different types of behaviours which we want to breed into or out of our dogs and have tests available which we can use to place breeding values on our dogs - thats got to be progress. Thats not to say if you have a breed thats supposed to be aloof and not very amicable that you need to breed dogs which are amicable but if we have a test for that which works to give us a scale we can work to and assign this grade to our selection process and eithe rbreed dogs which are or which are not amicable. There's fair argument to say even though our currents methods of living with a dog and deciding it has qualities we want to breed into our dogs or not is less effective but many orgs which are selecting dogs to work with such as assistance dogs, security dogs etc could eliminate some of their false starts by having a valid and reliable method of rating their candidates. I thought Tammie was a well presented speaker who did a great job in keeping us interested in what she had to say and it was good to see the clips of the differences in some of the behaviours. I would have liked to know how the deerhound scored. :D I would have liked the opportunity to chat with her about the start point in defining amicability in dogs for the study and a couple of other things but I think if we see it as simply a start point in a philosophy that temperament attributes can be tested the next step is in working out how much of that is genetics and how much is variable. We need to be able to see it and measure it if its ever going to be more than just a theory.

Hang on Slow down! It's been about temperament - fearfulness, agression, and over excitability. Not various breed characteristics. Ill try and work off my notes but I think some of what you guys have to say isn't really relevant to what happened. Pauline Bennett was well spoken and what she had to say was interesting though I don't think that with the main part of what she presented was anything that new to most breeders. In the main it was about being sure to breed with a focus on temperament as well as anything else we may be selecting for. Basically she said that if a dog's behaviour is predictable with well-described traits then it's easier to find suitable homes for them. I didn't agree with a couple of her basic beliefs - 1 was That purebred breeders were constrained by breed standards because we focus on how the dog looks which are easily evaluated by the judges. It felt to me that she was saying that we muck it up because of the fact that we only care about the way the dog looks. I think she failed to explain and I have no way of knowing if she understands that showing a dog is only one part of the testing process for a breeding dog. That good breeders do select for temperament as well as health and conformation. A good ethical breeder wouldn't have a dog in their breeding program, which had temperament issues regardless of whether it had a perfect "look" or not. She made a couple of comments I'm sorry we didn't have time to chat about with her. One was that ANKC breeders are not able to breed for the pet market when in fact as long as that's not all they do according to our codes of conduct they are able to do just that. There's no rule which says if you breed you have to show your dogs and what is required is that you consider future generations past the litter you are producing now so you have your eye on whets best for the breed as well as what's best for the pet buyers which are taking your dogs into their homes this litter. The other was a question she posed in the after question time which was - Words to the effect that If people are breeding show dogs perhaps they should not breed pet dogs. However, the thrust of it for us is that temperament issues do have a genetic component and we should be aware of that and consider it in our breeding programs - on that I agree with her. Mike Goddard was also interesting and he discussed potential selection methods - specifically Estimated breeding values for what ever ever our goal for each litter was. He explained various modes of inheritance and explained that most genetic issues breeders have to deal with are not single genes [PRA for example] but rather many genes and environmental factors [HD AND EPILEPSY FOR EXAMPLE]. He also posed a question about whether people selecting for show dogs were perhaps not compatible with breeding pets. He explained that no matter what we were aiming for in each litter that it was important to select the best dog within each breed and that because so many are polygenic that the best way to do that is to develop a data rich resource which breeders could use to pinpoint what dogs in what breeds would be most suitable to use with their bitches to aid them in reaching their goal. However, we have to make the info freely available and keep accurate records in order to do that and all of us would need to participate if it were to be a success. The basic message was - you get what you select for and most times you loose what you don't pay attention. Sort of like - identify your goal, work out what you have to do to get there and then consider what you are prepared to compromise on to get that. Paul McGreevy spoke of how some conformation traits may cause some breeds to suffer and that we should consider how what we do if we breed to extremes may impact on quality of life. He spoke of how much we need accurate research which will help us to be more aware of prevalence in this country and discussed the LIDA program. This to me sound fantastic and a much needed resource to help us to sort out fact from assumption on what sort of things our dogs are suffering with and I believe it will track things like trends which may show up into the future to help us to be on top of what we need to test for and eliminate from our breeding programs. I asked Paul if there was some method in this data base to identify who was breeding each animal that was being treated and diagnosed. This is simply because we are only interested in the dogs we breed and given that we only breed approx 10 % of puppies born in Australia each year we don't want to be pinged for things puppy farmers and cross bred breeders are breeding. In fact if we cant identify what diseases dogs we breed turn up with in difference to any other then the data becomes useless to us and anyone else who wants to judge the fitness of purebred dogs. He told me that he would allocate the task of sorting out issues such as these with a PHD student - which sounds good but he didn't really convince me that this was definitely a priority to be covered when I spoke with him privately. In my opinion any purebred dog breeder or dog registry such as Dogs NSW [who have pledged 30,000] to the project should ensure that this is something that will occur BEFORE they hand over any cash because I think its something that will either make it great or a waste of a potentially great resource. There were a couple of other things which I would like the opportunity to discuss with Paul. He seems to think that purebred breeders are not able to have the stud books open when in fact in Australia from day one there has always been the ability for any breeder to apply for this to happen and there are many examples of when exactly this happened and in fact currently the mini bull terriers have an ability to use bull terriers in their breeding programs. Their studbook is open. That's because someone put the proposal together and was able to present how it would be done and why it needed to be done and any of us have the right and the ability to do the same and apply to the ANKC to open the stud books. He spoke of the opening of the stud books in the UK for the Dalmatians as if it were a new thing and never done before. The way bob -tailed boxers were accepted in the UK was because someone opened the stud book. There are several examples Id like to talk over with him. I think [almost sure] that he was saying we need to open our stud book and outcross and then back breed to allow our gene pools to be more diverse and Id love to discuss with him the technicalities of this and how he would advise this could be done, how often to what objective and how we can prevent us being in the same place we are but with mutant genes in the mix we didn't know to expect or test for. I thought he was really interesting and easy to talk to but I was disappointed I didn't have enough time or opportunity to narrow it all down a bit. Next came Kate Scoeffel. I think what she is trying to do in bringing in commercial breeders who will agree to a code of conduct is great given that commercial dog breeding is a reality and its better in my opinion to try to differentiate someway between those who operate one way over another. Some of her views are controversial, and I would like the opportunity to discuss some issues with her she raised which related to canine husbandry such as back to back litters, age for which dogs should be able to reproduce, how many litters they should have and what type of accommodations breeding dogs should be kept in and a couple of others. I thought it was unfortunate that in order to explain why she breeds first cross puppies for profit it was necessary to make negative comment on purebred breeders and their dogs - but it was a minor irritation. While I think the concept is good there were some things which I felt needed perhaps a bit more thinking through. The fact is I think the codes she presented on the whole are much lighter than most state's codes of practice and it will be interesting to see how many large scale commercial puppy farmers are prepared to step up to the plate and take back dogs etc. Kate also said that she thought the pet shop should take the place of the breeder when the breeder sold their pups to the pet shop and that "perhaps pet shops could work in with shelters or something." In other words she wants her breeders to be accountable but they get let off the hook for that if they sell them via a pet shop or an agent etc. I'm not saying that's good or bad - simply repeating what was said. She had some novel ideas when it came to working with purebred breeders which would probably stretch the friendship a bit. She wants purebred breeders to work with cross bred breeders to enable us to get feedback on how our dogs perform when they are used for cross bred litters and she said she would like it if when she approached a purebred "beagle breeder" for a puppy for breeding first cross puppies that rather than the breeder throw her hands in the air and run away that they offered her a good quality dog which she could put in her breeding program. I'm not sure how long it will take me to warm to that idea because I have to admit that this beagle breeders hands are in the air and I'm saying "not bloody likely" -I'm sure she would expect nothing less of me and would understand but I do think there are probably some things to be gained by treating each other with respect and sharing principals and science resources in canine husbandry. Id like to think that even though we have differences in our goals we could still benefit more by seeing what we might have in common rather than bring what we disagree on to the table. Ill come back later and talk about what I got from the student presentations.

Does Deerhoundowner wish for me to pick him/her up from the airport as well - I'm going to be there anyway ??? Elfin - was it yourself who spoke with me wanting to come with me to the seminar? Deerhoundowner is flying in this afternoon, but thank you so much for the offer. I am taking the dawgs to the train station to meet her so that she knows who I am. Hopefully I will be the only person at Darling Station with three Deerhounds!!! We will be getting a taxi to the seminar but would love to meet you there before we go in... So it's Erny, Steve, Elfin and deerhoundowner... anyone else? goldchow too

Beagle at 16.

A couple of months ago the MDBA was approached by someone who offered us lots of stuff to open our doors and allow DD breeders in. I explained they were welcome to apply but that we would need to be able to see that they had something other than simply profit as a goal in their breeding programs and I felt that was going to be an impossible task considering they only do one litter and dont consider the future impact. Im guessing the same person who offered us this is now backing the pet owners group.We could have used the money too. This is a good thing as to date there isnt a way to distinguish the better commercial breeders to any of the rotten ones and though I think it kind of attempts to legitimise puppy farmers I figure that they are going to be there regardless and its better to give them an opt in method of being accredited than nothing. This still leaves the MDBA as the only dog related group in this country where its members have agreed not to sell puppies to pet shops and a bunch of other things which distinguishes our members from any other group's members.

Im happy for them to promote the dogs they breed based on the facts of what they breed rather than having to compare them to purebreds because there is no comparison. Its like comparing apples to oranges. Just as a purebred breeder has to tell their buyers that certain genetic issues are known to be in the breed and how they need to manage them DD breeders need to do the same. Quote from Australian Association of Pet Dog Breeders website Welcome Welcome to the home page of the Australian Association of Pet Dog Breeders. In this site you will find dog breeders who are committed to breeding healthy pets with great temperaments. Some of our breeders breed purebred dogs, some breed crossbreds and some are developing new breeds not yet recognised in the purebred dog world. If you purchase a dog from an AAPDB member you can be confident that you will get a predictable puppy which has been bred with care and thought. You will know that that your puppy’s parents are living comfortable lives and that they will retire at a reasonable age and live out their retirement as pets. You can join our owners community which will give you access to the owners forum, and the opportunity to meet up with other puppy owners for fun and socialisation. Quotes Re first cross labs and poodles. Kate's family pets You can see from the table above that there is a considerable range in size with a small number of dogs as large as Labradors and a few smaller than miniature Schnauzers. The size of the sire has an influence on this – not surprisingly the Toy males have smaller progeny – but within most litters there is a marked variation in the size of the pups. Coat Type My Labradoodles are all shaggy dogs. Their coats vary in thickness, texture, length and degree of wave or curl. They have a range of coat types ranging from short thin coarse hairy coats that are very easy care through to very thick long curly coats which are virtually identical to poodle coats and require regular clipping. These characteristics of the coat seem to be independently segregating – i.e. the coats can be: soft short, thick and curly, very soft, long, thin and straight, soft, thick, long and wavy, coarse, ……… etc, etc. In fact the way we have described them there could be 68 different coat combinations and when you see 30 or 40 dogs at a picnic it is clear that very few dogs have exactly the same coat type. With regard to shedding about 70% are low or moderate shedders, 10% of dogs are non-shedding and the remaining 20% shed a lot (some as much as a Labrador it seems). I can't predict shedding with confidence – based on the results of the survey I have found that the chance of getting a non or low shedding dog is about 50% whether or not shedding was a priority. There are however among the pups a very few that we can confidently predict will be non shedding (about 5%) Skin disorders are the most common problems presented to veterinarians in dog and cat practice. The survey showed that many labradoodles had skin problems varying from trivial to serious.Atopy (the same disease which causes Hay fever in people) is an allergy to airborne allergens and is common in both Labradors, Poodles and Labradoodles. In Labradors the commonest symptom is "hot spots" and in Poodles the symptoms are most commonly foot chewing and sore ears. I can't find any data on the precise incidence of this problem in Labs or Poodles or even in the general dog population but allergic skin problems are a very common problem presenting to veterinary surgeries. Of the Labradoodles with skin problems, most show only the occasional ear problem, foot chewing, hot spot or itch. About 30% had recurrent skin problems and between 5 – 10% had full blown atopy symptoms with a range of allergic reactions. We do not offer a refund with dogs affected by allergic skin problems but will offer veterinary advice and management support. End Quotes . I rest my case!

This course is put out at under cost price and covers everything you need to know.It includes a text book. It covers the questions you wont know to ask yet and you get access to a lot of resources such as contracts and forms to help keep records and loads of research tools to teach you how to go about it all and lots of support along the way. http://www.mdba.net.au/product_info.php?cP...;products_id=48 Julie

There's no point in giving the bitch a GA to determine if she is desexed until she is healthy.The dog cant go to a knew home if she is ill and no one wants to put the dog through any stress until that bit has been sorted out.You wouldnt even go after an ultra sound until she is fit to go because its a waste of money if she is too ill to go home or if she dies from parvo.Personally I think its unlikely its parvo because dogs which have either desexing or C section scars are usually vaccinated.they arent taking the easy way out as just puttingthe dog in a home and assuming the scar is a desexing scar would be less expensive and a quick fix in comparison to checking and paying a vet money first. When rescue send home a dog which they dont know the status on or which is ill or has temperament issues its not just that dog and that family which are impacted. There are a lot of wonderful people who are working their hearts out to promote rescue dogs and if something goes wrong it makes the concept of taking a rescue dog less attractive for people who hear about it.Its not just the reputation of that group its the overall perception of all rescue dogs which get the back wash.Thats why when rescue groups are operating outside of what reputable groups have accepted as best practice they are so hard on them and they wont work withthem because they understand how what one rescue group does can make them look bad too. Each group and every time a dog finds a new home its one cell of a bigger organism and when any group or person cuts corners or compromises on things they shouldnt to get dogs in and out quickly that affects the public perception and the view law makers have on private rescue groups. So for them its not just about the dogs today but the future of rescue and many more dogs given a chance to survive way into the future. Its also a situation sometimes when the group is flat out and hasnt the time to take to to see the questions you may have or how you're feeling to explain what they are up to and chat about why they make some of the decisions they do. Its a good idea before you decide you want to work with one group or another to go after it as if you are interviewing them rather than them just interviewing you so you know before you start what their policies are and how they operate and make their decisions so you know they fit in with your values.If the group is smart they will have a written policy which covers dogs in this situation which they have worked out before they get to it so when its happening its not impacted by one person's emotion or working out what they should do.If thats the case then when you enter the group you can read up on ther policies and know that they have already thought about it and worked through it and decided that even though there may be some variables that because its policy there is no expectation that its open to debate. Its a hard juggling act in rescue to cover all that needs to be done and ensure that the people who are helping out and fostering etc are able to feel safe to talk about issues like this. That they are made to feel part of the team and feel they have someone to chat to about how they feel and get their questions answered - their thoughts discussed so they too understand why things happen the way they do.

You O.K. for a ride from the airport Erny?

Its all a bit hard to follow- quote These guidelines indicate the minimum standards of accommodation, management and care to meet the physical and behavioural needs of seized animals along with monitoring requirements and operational procedures for both management and staff. The Kurri Kurri Animal Shelter does not meet the standards prescribed in the draft Code of Practice. Investigations of the options of relocating the animal shelter or contracting for the provision of the service have commenced. If that were a private rescue or a breeder or for that matter even a dog owner they would have had their animals seized and charged with duty of care etc.

Some dogs shed all the time. Maremmas shed once maybe twice a year depending on sex and whether they are entire.

There were puppies in a local pet shop a couple of months ago Maremma cros cattle dog. They looked more like Maremmas than cattle dogs - you can bet your life when they get into trouble it will be Maremma cross and impact on the breed reputation. Bastards.

629,000 plus dogs bred each year in Australia of them approx 69,000 are bred by registered breeders. Someone other than us is breeding puppies. Julie

No back yard breeding isnt illegal and nor is puppy farming.

Just a quick reminder to anyone who still needs to enter their dog's details onto our survey please do so now.We need all breeds, and all cross breeds, we need healthy as well as not so healthy and we need any dog which has been alive in the last 10 years. The response rates have dropped to only one or two a day and we need to close it off soon to calculate the stats we have collected. http://www.mdba.net.au/breed_survey.php