kayla1

During the day, my dogs like to sleep in odd places. Annie tends to perch on things like a cat would, and I sometimes find her snoozing on the back of the couch etc. She also loves anything soft and fluffy - the softer and cosier the better. :laugh: Meanwhile her big sister Kayla has taken to lying across the hallway, or across doorways (which confuses poor Coco no end because he doesn't know how to get past). Does your dog like to sleep in odd places?

Coco will try to lick me after a shower...but I don't allow it because I know what he's been eating! :laugh:

Sorry, you're not the only one! I have confused myself and now I don't actually know!! Just went and checked an email from my local supplier (agility club) and it's Earthborn Holistic Ocean Fusion grain free. I pay $85 for 12kg. What is the frequent buyer program? Any idea on what sort of savings? We get a discount through our agility club so just wondering if this discount is comparable! Thanks :D Boy...that's cheap....at my local supplier it is $82 for 6 kilos I paid about $98 for the 12kg ocean fusion last time, and that was when it was on special at petstock. So $85 is pretty cheap.

She's lovely. :) Good on you for giving her a home!

Do you honestly believe that the data provided by the Victorian Declared Dog Registry is so inaccurate in ALL respects that no conclusions whatsoever can be drawn? We know there are inaccuracies in respect to breed, that does NOT render the data entirely unreliable if conclusions are based on that data which IS accurate. If you truly believe this data is so misleading as to be entirely unusable, perhaps take it up with the DPI. Brookestar made an unfounded assertion that most declared dogs are small dogs. Through evidence this has been proved to be incorrect. Regarding your second point, if we had evidence to show that attacks by small dogs go unreported, then your conclusion would be correct. But we do not have that evidence. To the OP, sorry for going OT.

Size has very little to do with anything. MOST dogs who are declared dangerous or menacing are small dogs, that are yappy and untrained. ANY animal control officer can confirm this. The info in the attached link displays declared dogs according to the Victorian Declared Dog Registry as of 2011. Only a very small proportion of declared dogs listed here are actually small dogs. link What an brilliantly researched article. Who knew there were actually two types of pit bulls? I'll definitely be trusting that news site for information. It is not purporting to be a research article, rather it is simply highlighting data obtained from the Victorian Declared Dog Registry about declared dangerous and menacing dogs. Regarding the breed, that is what the dogs have been registered as when declared and is not something dreamt up by the author of the article, however inaccurate that breed description may be! Assuming the breed inaccuracies don't include too many 4kg dogs being mistaken for 40kg dogs, I think it's safe to say this data provides ample evidence to refute the baseless assertion that most dogs who are declared menacing or dangerous are small dogs. Hence the reason why the link was posted. Does that not suggest to you though that the data is not accurate and therefore not of any use? If people do not know what breed of dog they own (i.e the dog is very likely to be incorrectly registered) or if they mistakenly call it something else, your data will be totally unreliable. Take for example this.. Malt x Shih (an incredibly common breed mix) are represented twice. The Kerry Blue Terrier (a small breed with only 12 breeders listed for Dol) are represented four times. It seems very likely the more malt x shihs should be represented but what are they registered as? Who the hell knows. The data itself in terms of number of dogs declared dangerous, location etc is accurate. What is not entirely accurate is the breed description of certain dogs. The fact that there are breed inaccuracies does not make the data useless; it simply means we can't rely entirely on the breed description. I don't dispute the example you provide may be correct in relation to breed, but the assertion made by Brookestar that I responded to was about the size of declared dogs, not breed. Even assuming the unlikely event has occurred, that a small breed dog has been incorrectly registered as a large breed dog when it has been declared, the data still provides ample evidence that most dogs declared menacing and dangerous are NOT small dogs. As someone else has commented, sure it may be the case that attacks by small dogs are not reported as often. But obviously we have no evidence for dogs that have attacked and have not been reported. But if someone makes unfounded assertions about the size of dogs that have been declared, then we need to examine the evidence, and the evidence tells us the majority are not small dogs.

Size has very little to do with anything. MOST dogs who are declared dangerous or menacing are small dogs, that are yappy and untrained. ANY animal control officer can confirm this. The info in the attached link displays declared dogs according to the Victorian Declared Dog Registry as of 2011. Only a very small proportion of declared dogs listed here are actually small dogs. link What an brilliantly researched article. Who knew there were actually two types of pit bulls? I'll definitely be trusting that news site for information. It is not purporting to be a research article, rather it is simply highlighting data obtained from the Victorian Declared Dog Registry about declared dangerous and menacing dogs. Regarding the breed, that is what the dogs have been registered as when declared and is not something dreamt up by the author of the article, however inaccurate that breed description may be! Assuming the breed inaccuracies don't include too many 4kg dogs being mistaken for 40kg dogs, I think it's safe to say this data provides ample evidence to refute the baseless assertion that most dogs who are declared menacing or dangerous are small dogs. Hence the reason why the link was posted.

I also have some of the leather leashes from K9Pro, and another leather leash (can't remember the brand), and all have been very good - soft leather and strong clips.

It will be a few years for me, but I do dream about what I'd like in the future...papillon, IG, ESS, or another brittany. Or perhaps the next one will be another foster failure. :laugh:

I used to wonder about that with my older girl, whether someone would recognise her, because she came from a shelter not too far away. I have spoken to the owner of my boy that I have the history for, and she didn't want him hence why he was surrendered. My other two dogs came from a completely different area. What worries me more, for rescue dogs of certain breeds/looks, is the disturbing lengths that some people will go to after being rejected for that dog, but that's OT.

When I tell Annie there will be no more isqueak balls... And this one I put in the toy thread, but it's more suited here. Maxie is the non-smile, behind Kayla...

All of my dogs are rescues, but I only know the history of one of them. The others I can only guess at. Although I know my older girl had been adopted and returned to the shelter a couple of times before I adopted her. The one that I have history for spent the first 11 years of his life in a backyard - never walked, never met other dogs or people, never allowed inside. It absolutely breaks my heart to think that all he had for 11 years was a kennel and a backyard, always alone, and to think of all the things he missed out on. Then I remind myself that he doesn't think like that and look back on those lonely years, rather what he cares about is the here and now. So I make sure that, in the here and now, we enjoy the good life and make up for that lost time. He will never be alone again. :)

Thought it might be handy to have a thread where we can review dog toys. :) Isqueak balls - love them, but of course the softer ones don't last long and crack easily. Interestingly in my recent clean run order I received a mix of the harder rubber high pitched squeaks, and some of the soft rubber quack and crack ones. Isqueak birdies - are popular here and have lasted a long time with no chew damage. It's hard to squeak them though as the rubber is very hard. Crackle balls - my dogs loved them but in one of them the plastic insert was flattened in a few minutes, so I haven't given them to the dogs since. Arachnoids - dogs liked them but one of my dogs chewed off a bit of the soft rubber in no time. So not for chewers. Kong squeeezz balls - dogs love them, they haven't been chewed yet, but one is starting to lose its squeak. Doggles plush balls - they do have stuffing inside, as I discovered this morning when I found the remains of one. Not the most popular toy here. Jolly tugs - these have been good, even after the dogs rip the cover off they can either play tug with just the cover or play with the ball inside. Anyway that's a start, so add your reviews! ETA you can review the same toys or different toys - it's always good to have multiple reviews.

Thanks for replying Cosmolo and Allywil. Yes I see how it would be different for a fearful dog reacting. Interesting, I think I see both examples of expectations. Violation of expectations - we were at the park the other day and there was a car parked where it shouldn't have been (where cars don't usually park), so the dogs reacted by barking at it. Or at home, Annie will often bark at things that are out of place eg a spider on the wall, clothes that have fallen off the washing line etc. Is that what you mean by reacting to a violation of expectations? Expectations leading to anticipation, which explains why Annie reacts more when we walk on the golf course - lots of birds, she expects to see them, so she is already in that state ready to react. Using LAT has been good, and she does defer to me quite a bit now, but it's much harder for her to focus when the rainbow lorikeets are flapping about in front teasing her. :laugh: But I guess it will always be more difficult in that environment when the dog is already anticipating reacting.

Isqueaks are the favourites here...

I don't know how it happened, my toy was there a minute ago... :laugh:

I'd be interested in seeing the evidence to support your assertion, given that the LDH AR provides no statistical info on whether admitted cats are feral or not.

Apologies if this has been discussed already, but I'm curious as to why some dogs react more in certain situations and not others. As an example, Annie is more likely to react if she is walked at a local park or familiar area, yet is pretty good when I take her somewhere completely different (eg when I took her to training or other dog meets). I'm wondering if this is related to confidence, perhaps in the different environment she is not as confident so less likely to react, and more confident in familiar surroundings so more likely to react? I should add Annie reacts primarily to movement (birds, dogs etc), so it's not fear based, which I guess would change it. Or perhaps it's not confidence as such, but something else?

Great action shots! :laugh:

There was another thread too, I'll try to find it. ETA here it is, not myelopathy but some more ideas for muscle strengthening. Hope it helps with your boy.

Regarding the daughter keeping the dogs, who knows what any of us would do in that situation. She would be in shock and probably doesn't know what she is doing. Either way she has to live with that for the rest of her life, and I imagine that would be almost unbearable.

Poor boy. There are some ideas in this thread

Size has very little to do with anything. MOST dogs who are declared dangerous or menacing are small dogs, that are yappy and untrained. ANY animal control officer can confirm this. The info in the attached link displays declared dogs according to the Victorian Declared Dog Registry as of 2011. Only a very small proportion of declared dogs listed here are actually small dogs. link

I love dogs of all sizes, but I am realistic in terms of damage potential. Personally I think the sooner people acknowledge the fact that certain breeds/sizes are capable of causing greater harm, the sooner dog owners can work together to minimise the risk. If you don't acknowledge this then you can't move forward and the discussion will continue to go in circles. It goes without saying that this does not negate the responsibilities of owners of other breeds/sizes.

Sometimes fences appear adequate but are not. The American bulldog that got out nearby to attack another dog, broke through a 6ft wooden gate. Someone walking past may not even know there is a problem until it is too late. Like others I drive my dogs to various places to walk, and no longer walk in the local area.