Mum to Emma

I believe foods such as Purina One Lamb & Rice, Optimum Chicken, Vegetables & Rice and IAMS Healthy Naturals are wheat free, or aren't I reading the labels right? Is "cereal protein" wheat? And if so, why does the Optimum variety I've mentioned include cereal protein but not wheat, whereas the other Optimum varieties specifically list wheat as one of the ingredients?

You'd expect the manufacturer to say that! My vet said you can split them, which makes sense when you consider the weight range of the dog specified on the box in relation to each size of tablet/chew. For example, Interceptor blue can be given to 22KG dogs and 45KG dogs. So the manufacturer is saying it's OK to give dogs the same dosage even if one is twice the weight of the other. Clearly precision in dosage/weight ratio is not extremely important when it comes to worming.

My whippet was diagnosed with ear tip vasculitis when she was 2. She had been developing sores on the tips of her ears that would scab but never heal, and would open and bleed when she shook her head. After at least half a dozen trips to my very experienced vet (who suggested all sorts of solutions such as cortisone cream and even surgery to remove the ear tips), I went to a specialist dermatologist who immediately diagnosed the vasculitis and prescribed Trental. Trental is a blood viscocity agent that improves circulation to the micro vessels such as you find in the ear tips. It's a "human" medication used for intermittent claudication. He said they're not 100% sure what causes it, but one hypothesis is over-vaccination of puppies. The micro blood vessels block when the immune systems responds to the vaccination, and they scar and cut off circulation, with poor healing the result. Considering the fact that my dog is very sensitive to a lot of medications, I suspect this scenario applied to her. Indeed, the specialist suggested I not give her C5 vaccinations, only C3 incase the former was overloading her immune system. The Trental controlled the situation for several years until I had to take her off the medication before dental surgery (Trusopt can exacerbate bleeding). I decided to try her off it as the specialist had mentioned another dog who had had to come off medication and that the symptoms had not recurred. Emma did have a bit of a relapse the following winter, but 12 months later the sores healed and never recurred. That was over 5 years ago. Fortunately, this is the only skin condition my whippet has suffered, although she has lost a lot of hair on the upper surface of her tail.

Any suggestions for keeping the canine's clean? Crunching bones, rawhide etc works on the molars and smaller teeth, but the canine are used for tearing (not chewing) so tartar accumuates along he gumline. Large bones are out of the question (one of my whippets has broken teeth and is also a voracious chewer so is likely to do more damage).

Can you get an earlier appointment with a different dermatologist? I can highly recommend Greg Burton at Melbourne Veterinary Specialists Centre. They are in Glen Waverley and Essendon Fields. Melbourne Veterinary Specialist Centre (click the DERMATOLOGY DEPARTMENT button) If your pug's overall health is deteriorating, I would think the situation has become urgent. Perhaps a chronic internal infection is setting in. Directly opposite the Specialist Centre in Blackburn Road, Glen Waverley is Animal Emergency Centre. They are open 27/7. It may be worth giving them a call now.

Yes, they are. They might cost twice as much as your local vet but they will diagnose the problem in half the time. However, you should do your homework first. Get the specialist's name and Google him/her for details of experience (do they lecture at local universities, overseas, have they published papers on their speciality?). You will pay the same for a specialist who has just earned accreditation as one who has specialised in their field for many years and is an international authority in their field. You're paying premium prices, so make sure you get the best.

So why not ban all cars? Oh that's right, people would object. He never asked for dogs to be banned. He asked for them to be restrained? Seems fair enough. Why not just ask for them to be controlled and penalise those whose dogs attack wildlife. The laws exist to do that now. That's what we do with cars.. speed limits and penalise the irresponsible. Every call for dogs to be kept on lead in all places is another nail in the coffin of responsible dog ownership. Dogs SHOULD be kept on a leash at all times when off private property except in designated off leash areas. To say you could with absolute certainty stop every dog attacking a koala or other animal through training is crazy. Are your eyes fixed on your dog every second that he is off leash? Particularly in a bush situation, this would be impossible. In the same way we have speed limits in an attempt to restrict irresponsible road behaviour, we need animal control laws to protect people and other animals from certain instinctive aspects of dog behaviour in areas of high risk, including urban areas (where there are a lot of domestic animals around) and bushland (where there is vulnerable wildlife).

The dog looks more like a Maremma to me. The coat is far too woolly for a GR. There was a Maremma that frequented an off-leash park near me that was notorioius for attacking other dogs. Of course, the owner couldn't care less and kept on bringing it back...

No but I'd expect a very big fine (current fines not enough to be a deterrant IMO. Easier to risk fines than repair fences/build a dog run etc), I'd expect the council to come and inspect my fences etc and give me due dates for remediation (and the dog not allowed outside unleashed until fixed). If I didn't comply the dog would be seized. These threads often focus on fault (it isn't the dog's fault, der). What needs to happen IMO is for owners to take their responsbility seriously and be held to very strict account when things go wrong. And here lies the main issue - dog control by Councils has regressed to that of the 1970s. In other words, it is non-existent. Sure, dogs don't roam the streets as they once did, but Councils take a wait-and-see approach, or a "wait until after the event (attack)" approach to the issue. In Stonnington (for interstaters, one of Melbourne's wealthiest municipalities) there are only TWO council workers dedicated to enforcing leash laws. As a result, animal control regulations are routinely ignored. In Stonnington there is clearly more money to be made enforcing parking restrictions than leash laws, so dog control is a joke. The result? Responsible dog owners cannot walk safely through on-leash areas and elderly dog-walkers are at risk of injury by out of control animals in Council parks. My 87 year old father recently fell on the footpath when an dog charged from the front of a property, and my brother has (similar to the woman and her JR that sparked this discussion) been stalked on 2 occasions by packs of off-leash dogs in ON leash Stonnington parks. My brother was fit enough to hold his mini-schnauzer above his head, away from snapping jaws. I fear what would have happened if my father had been in the same situation.

EXACTLY!!

I get the impression that this attitude is reflected in the arrogant behaviour a handful of big dog owners display - i.e. "I don't particularly care if my dog is out of control and may get into a fight - MY dog won't get hurt!"

Merely killing the dog achieves nothing - the owner will likely just go get another DA or predatory dog, and not necessarily contain it properly either. It's not like there aren't thousands of DA and predatory dogs out there for them to adopt - the majority of dogs would kill other pets if you let them roam. Even dogs that won't fight other dogs will kill cats or pet bunnies or chickens or chase sheep if allowed to do so. From what I can work out, the call to PTS come from people that think that their dogs would never do such a thing to any other animal, and so that any owner of a predatory or DA dog deserves whatever they get merely for owning such an animal. ;) Exactly. And where is the line drawn? I know plenty of dogs that will kill smaller animals, are they all "unfit to live in society"? But do they kill small animals that are attached to a leash and accompanied by a dog walker??? That indicates an extremely high prey drive and makes these particular dogs so dangerous. It's a totally different scenario than going after a wandering cat/dog/chook that has crossed their path, when many dogs will chase for 'fun' and no know what to do with the animal when they catch it. My brother had a GSD that caught a rabbit once and brought it back to the house with it still wriggling in its mouth! It the dropped the rabbit which raced off. Clearly the GSD liked the chase and catch, but wasn't interested in mutilating it.

The attack occurred on 2 January - a Sunday. How likely is it that Council workers (or subcontractors) were at work on 1 January, or indeed at any time prior to Christmas? That's in excess of a week that the Malamute's owners had to detect a weakness in the fence.

I've seen my dog do the same thing to birds and other small wildlife catching his prey eye when we've been out walking, had he been allowed, he certainly would have chased and grabbed these animals. I'm not saying that in this instance with the JRT it was a prey driven attack, but if it was, prey drive is hardly unusual behaviour. IF they saw the dog as a prey item, then just seeing it moving around would have triggered ("provoked") them and it would have had nothing to do with territoriality. I'm not saying that excuses their behaviour but that it's not as rare or unexplainable as you seem to think it is. So do you think it's reasonable that a dog or dogs should routinely attack another dog on sight?? And which of your dogs were you referring to - the husky?

"Such acts of aggression" are sadly what all dogs are capable of even nice family pets, when people understand that every one will be safer. "All breeds" maybe, but certainly not all dogs. And definitely not in the circumstances that this woman faced. This morning I heard more of an interview with her given yesterday on radio, and she said that she didn't see or hear the dogs coming as they approached silently from behind. She turned when her dog became aware of them and found that they were right behind, standing separately one either side of her and her dog. Clearly they were stalking with the intention to attack. It must have been terrifying. These dogs weren't provoked in any way, nor were the woman and her JR on their territory. Indeed, their house was 2km away. These dogs are a menace and a danger and should be PTS.

I totally agree. It doesn't matter who let the dogs out. Unless the owners can guarantee that they will be enclosed 27/4 in the house or in a fully enclosed dog-run and only allowed off the property wearing muzzles, they should be PTS. With this one incident they have proven that they are a danger to other animals and are not suited to an urban environment (and indeed a rural environment where a neighbour would be entitled to shoot the dogs if they threatened livestock).

About 3 years ago I faced this issue with my whippet Bobby. I had spent about $1000 a day after I took him to the emergency clinic late one Saturday night. He was in obvious pain and had tried to bite me earlier that day after I had pressed his abdomen whilst drying him after a bath (most unusual for a gentle whippet). For the previous week I had noticed that his face was swollen in the morning (which my regular vet decided was an allergy) It turns out he had an abdominal tumor that was blocking the lymphatic system and ended up causing his limbs to swell and fluid to accumulate in his chest. Bobby was lined up for an MRI and possible surgery after the extent of the tumour was defined. But when I went to visit him late at night at the emergency hospital I decided ENOUGH. He didn' t understand what he was going through. They wanted to put even more needles into his chest to drain the fluid that was accumulating and pressing on his heart. All he understood was the pain and discomfort which I knew would continue for months if I went ahead with the surgery (which involved breaking the rib case to extract a tumour which was near to his heart). I COULD afford to continue the treatment, but at the end of the day you must remember that dogs only understand pleasure or pain. They can't appreciate that you are putting them through agony for what might, in the long run, result in little if any quality life. They're not like us. We agonise for what may not be (see our children/grandchildren grow up?). Dog's live day-to-day. That's what we need to remember when making these terrible decisions. Oh, and to people who exclaim "how could you spend that much money on an animal??". Ask them how much they spent on their last holiday! Holidays are a mere memory when you return home after, say, 3 weeks. The love of an animal is never forgotten.

Sure that's fine. I'm not a card carrying robot either but if I see a sign saying no dogs, I dont go in there with my dogs - either on the ground or up in the air. It's irresponsible. Good for you! I'm sick of people who ignore 'dogs must be on leash' signs. Who will literally stand next to such a sign and take OFF their dog's leash so that it can run free in an ON LEASH park. I have as much right to be able to walk my dogs in an area where I'm guaranteed not to be harassed by other dogs as they have to let their precious pooches charge, chase, and poop anywhere and everywhere. There are plenty of leash free parks, but these selfish a*seholes are just too lazy to walk the extra 100m to find one. In this case the council officer was being over zealous and the fine was ludicrous but they are no doubt responding to complaints about the huge number of dogs owners who think dog control signs don't apply to them.

About 3 years ago a vet dental specialist in Melbourne recommended the Royal Canin equivalent of T/D (I'm not sure what it's called). Said it was the only one that works. He was in the middle of writing a paper on the subject.

My whippet has the same problem (her tail is almost identical to that in the photos) and she spends 99% of her day on carpet. I think it's a combination of things. If you look closely at the exposed skin on the tail you see small brown oil plugs blocking the pores. I wonder if this stops hair growth or makes existing hair particularly brittle so that it snaps off at the slightest contact. A few years back my whippet saw a vet dermatologist for a different problem and when looking at her tail said "We can do something about that but you wouldn't bother" (mind you, the condition wasn't as extreme then). He didn't elaborate and as it didn't worry me, I didn't take it further (I didn't fancy spending $100s of dollars exposing her to more chemicals to treat what is a cosmetic problem - the look of her tail doesn't bother her!) I will ask my vet on Wednesday but IMO general vets often don't diagnose skins problems accurately.

Obviously, your relative with the nasty Rottweiler has no control over his dog in the home. No dog of mine ever goes near the door when someone's there because that is MY door, MY house and I decide who comes and goes. What a ridiculous statement. This is a dog that has been exposed to the best training available and is owned by an experienced rottweiller owner, having owned 2 in the past. It is simply unpredictable and because of this (coupled with it size and weight) is a danger to anyone it perceives as a threat - which is anyone outside it's direct family circle. She lets people in - but prowls the room in a threating crouching posture, emitting a low growl. They have been told to put the dog down but won't do it because they don't believe in putting healthy dogs to sleep, but can't rehome it because it would be a danger to anyone else. The owner is a senior police officer. He's no fool. Ones choice of employment and success in one field hardly makes someone a genius or capable of making sensible judgement in other matters. The Rottie sounds like it has issues, that is what makes it unsafe, not the breed it happens to be. It could be said that the dog is exhibiting extreme, exaggerated behaviour innate in the breed. She's herding and guarding her pack. All outsiders are threatening and she's warning them off with her posture and growling when they enter her territory. So you think you know more about dogs than police dog handlers and trainers. Particularly in relation to a dog you've never met? But you are right in one respect. He hasn't used good judgment in this instance. The dog should be given the green dream as because of her size and bite capability, she is dangerous . She lives in a constant state of aggression/anxiety. Such a situtation benefits no one - neither the owners nor the dog.

The first correction here is that the Rottweiler IS NOT A FIGHTING BREED. The Rottweiler has a long history of herding, starting as far back as driving the food supply of the Roman Legions across the Alps. Later, in Germany, they were known as the Butcher's dog, driving cattle to market. Many Rottweilers are now herding sheep, cattle and ducks in Victoria and doing extremely well at it, my young boy included who has 2 herding titles. Herding is a stressful situation. Secondly my old girl visited primary schools for four years teaching children how to behave around dogs. You could not get a much greater urban environmental stressor, yet she behaved beautifully just as the standard requires "Being good natured, placid in basic disposition and fond of children, she is very devoted, obedient, biddable and eager to work". It is extremely irresponsible to label a whole breed due to the characteristics exhibited by a few. As you have stated "every Rottweiler is different" just the same as every dog owner is different. We should be encouraging responsible ownership to ensure ALL DOGS are sociable with bullet proof temperaments. Perhaps you could explain why GSDs and Rotties are typically used as guard dogs instead of, say, St Bernards and border collies?

Obviously, your relative with the nasty Rottweiler has no control over his dog in the home. No dog of mine ever goes near the door when someone's there because that is MY door, MY house and I decide who comes and goes. What a ridiculous statement. This is a dog that has been exposed to the best training available and is owned by an experienced rottweiller owner, having owned 2 in the past. It is simply unpredictable and because of this (coupled with it size and weight) is a danger to anyone it perceives as a threat - which is anyone outside it's direct family circle. She lets people in - but prowls the room in a threating crouching posture, emitting a low growl. They have been told to put the dog down but won't do it because they don't believe in putting healthy dogs to sleep, but can't rehome it because it would be a danger to anyone else. The owner is a senior police officer. He's no fool.

I have a relative (a police officer) who owns a rottweiller that has to be muzzled whenever someone outside the direct family comes into the house. The dog has been raised from a pup with love and affection, and has been subjected to the best training available through connections with the police force. However they have been told by trainers and a vet that the dog should be PTS as it is too dangerous. Her guarding instincts are too extreme. They refuse, despite the fact that their family includes an autistic child. My greatest fear is that one day someone in the family who has, perhaps, just been in contact with a strange dog or perhaps is simply wearing a new aftershave or perfume, startles the half-asleep dog and she attacks. To deny that certain breeds have a propensity for particular behaviors (sighthounds chasing, for example), is incredibly naive. And in certain instances of that breed, those innate characterisics will be extreme. An obsessively chasing greyhound is more a nuisance/danger to itself. However an obsessively guarding/fighting GSD is a danger to any animal/human that crosses its path. The guarding/fighting breeds such as rottweillers are far more likely AS A BREED to reactive aggressively in stressful situations. Yes, every rottweiller is different, and yes there will be examples of other breeds of dog that will react the same way (I'm sure someone on this forum will report on a bichon that savaged someone's grandmother!) but in an urban environment where the stresses are greater (on dogs and their owners!) we should be minimising risk by encouraging ownership of sociable breeds with bullet proof temperaments.

I have found that the the Black Dog martingale cotton webbing collars don't leave a mark on short haired dogs.