angelsun

I"ll snap some of my brats shortly (only have individuals) All are fat and cheeky and Mommy dog is doing a great job. Looks like one red boy will be staying here if someone else has HIS way!

OMG..where's the 'like' button on that one!! :)

HOW many times have I heard that...and still hear that....amazing how some beleive a mutt litter will 'contaminate' a bitch...many beleive that the bitch will NEVER produce a pure litter after a mongrel mating.

This is possibly everything that is wrong, all packed into one dog....I owned this bitch at one point...and the breeder went ten shades of crazy when I said she was being spayed and placed as she was not good for breeding...the breeder called and DEMANDED she be put on a plane and returned UN desexed...yeah...right.

Just over two weeks here and have eyes open..still not much fun yet....another couple weeks before they stop being milkbar slugs

I have another good one that was told a few years back and I still laugh my head off, but the person stating it, TRULY believed it! The longer the tie, the more pups the bitch will have! And then another favourite: The bitch won't have more pups than she has nipples......

Recently I've listened to a few people quote what I truly believe are 'breeders wives tales' that is, have no basis of scientific proof of actually being truthful. I would love to hear some of the things that others have heard, and discuss whether there is in fact truth to the 'tale' or is it just something believed for so long, that many think it's factual. I have been recently told, that too much protein in the diet will make a dog go east/west in the front. Now I"m aware that a high protein can cause growth issues and often can bring forward things like Pano in some breeds, but this was the first time I've heard it explain away a bad front. The dog in question is east west from the elbow as well as turns out at the pastern slightly, both creating quite a noticable fault. I'm not interested in discussions about the famous ones like, "she'll be a better dog once she has a litter" or "once they are neutered they all get fat". I"m thinking the ones about 'umbilical hernia being hereditary', 'once a ceasar always a ceasar' type things.

This was this girls first litter...the litter I had before with another bitch, was whelped laying down for the most part.

I have brought this up with the 'powers that be'. Individual dogs/pups MUST according to the new law, be listed with their chip numbers and yet all you have to do is go look at some breeds in the listings to see that it's not being done. For example, last time I looked about two or three weeks ago at the Cattle dogs..there was not ONE listing of all the Vic residents that included a chip number...I was told that DOL was not 'policing' the advertising....so then....if no one is held responsible, why bother to comply with the rules...and if that's the case, will this law actually matter? I can't tell you how many 'puppy for sale' flyers are pinned around that also don't comply....it's tempting to yank them all down. I hate the 'rule for me and rule for you' mentality!

squatting in a sit with bottom a few inches off the floor. (this last litter) Most of my girls lay down though.

Regardless of who does the rehoming...if it's done with the animals interest at the heart of the issue and not a convenience issue...I"m fine with it. MANY owners have had to rehome due to issues, and they do it very well, making sure they learn about the new home and what it will offer to the mature animal and its needs. It's no different than a breeder doing it. We all know there are lots of dogs rehomed because of the wrong reasons and put in the wrong situations, and it's something both owners and breeders are guilty of.

More info on this can be found at www.bodytalksystem.com I have a friend in Canada who's doing this and getting great results, both in areas like reproduction and in training. I"m wondering if there would be any interest for seminars or such?

Puppies are coming.....so far there are five and there are more lumps in that belly so I'm thinking three or four more. Mom is settling in nicely after being quite confused by the whole thing first up this morning!

Most dogs like honey either in their food or just on the tongue....there are so many other benefits to it too, but it's great to quickly keep sugar levels right.

What a great thread to follow!

About day 47in this photo....Due about the 22 I think.

Litter of 13 once....they split themselves into milk bar sittings.....it's amazing how they sort themselves out really, nursing then falling off to allow another to take the spot. Nature has a way of sorting this all out.....I had a bitch with 9 nipples that often had ten pups....they worked it out and all gained nicely without me sticking my nose into it.

White is a fault in the GSD but it doesn't mean that it can't be registered. According to the 'creator' of the breed, there is no bad coloured German Shepherds.....some in the 'big clubs' have tried to claim that sables are less correct and should be eliminated from the genepool. White sheps have been around longer than people want to admit (specially the fans of the black/tans) They aren't abominations...they are simply another coat colour. No more or less healthy or sane than any other colour. Was a sin when the powers that be, decided they didn't like the colour and pushed to have them removed from the game. Perhaps we'll see them brought back, since they generally have better toplines and temperaments than the status quo. Flame away..it's MY opinion and I'm entitled to it, as others seem to be. :)

Whatever you would feed an adult in raw..you can feed pups. Just make sure it's cut up a bit smaller. We use mince with bone all the time and nothing is ever left behind. We feed a variety of offal and include pasta/veg mix up. We currently have a litter here and their mother is raw/natural fed and they will not have kibble whilst they live here. We can't control what their new owners do, but while here, they will eat normal and natural food without preservatives or additives.

The colour is bb and a true chocolate (as we refer to them as) has a red nose and eye rims. To date, we have not had any choco's that are black nose/eye rims. I think the key arguement lies with the standard listing four colours (as I noted above) with the statement that any other colour should be considered unacceptable and not permitted. There are items in our standard that read 'undesirable' but clearly are not stated as being a DQ issue. Some are listed as severe faults, others as minor faults, but I read "not permitted" to be a simple cut and dried statement of fact and not open to interpretation. (?)

To flesh this out and understand it better: The disallowed colour is what we call chocolate..it's a chocolate/bronze and tan (like black and tan pattern) It's a recessive that we have found the gene to test to see if we get it. I had two in a litter many years ago..knew nothing about them..was told they were the only ones...have done a ton of learning since then and see now that the colour seems to be coming into fashion. I have no issues with the colour..it's there..I know where the gene came from and so it was only a matter of time before we saw it and it was admitted to exist. The colour currently is not listed in the standard or should I say, the four colours that are allowed (black/tan, red and shades of stag red, blue/tan and fawn) and the standard states that 'any other colour is not permitted'. Now this is sort of funny because when that standard was brought forward....too many were stating that the colour simply didn't exist, but clearly perhaps someone knew something the rest of us didn't? Now there is a faction to have the colour added to the standard....one arguement is that it was there and should be READDED...but in truth, it's not because it was never there in the first place. I"m not sure why suddenly there is this surge of interest, but there is. I"m at a total loss to understand the reason why ANYONE (judge or not) would show a dog with such a blatent DQ issue. This isn't a white spot, or a curved ear, or a hook tail or something like this.....this is a full colour issue that is clear in the standard...a standard that should be read and understood by judges, and most assuredly an exhibitor. I put forward the arguement that a dog of 60cm (a DQ) a blue eye, or an undescended testical...all DQ's....are the same as a non allowed colour and yet I"ve been told this isn't the case....that the dog in question, is of exceptional quality but a non allowed colour.....and the bottom line, being that a judge is exhibiting it. Perhaps I"m being a bit sensitive about all this..but this is my breed and I do my best to protect it's history and appearance and overall nature. I"m not against this colour...I bred two and defended their existance, as I do to this day.....but I feel quite caught on this, because yes, I"d like to see it recognized as a colour to be shown....but to see a judge take a dog in the ring, knowing it's wrong...and being awarded then basically trashing the judge for doing it....and this same judge has a chocolate dog in their ring and disallows it....my head to be honest is spinning!! Has anyone out there, in any breed....lobbied the governing canine council to put forward a colour or issue that was not permitted, and if so, what happened and how long did it take to rectify?

A discussion currently on one of the breed forums I subscribe to has brought forward the following situation: An exhibitor who bred a dog has shown this dog twice. The dog is a 'non allowed' colour. Once the dog was dismissed, the second time, the dog was given an Excellant and placed third in the class. The exhibitor knows that the colour is non allowed and commented that it 'wasn't the judges fault that they didn't know the breed standard very well'. The exhibitor is a judge. This situation has occured in the scandanavian region. Now, I argue, that the judge, because they hold that position, and as a breeder of that breed, should not have exhited the dog in the first place, and should not have, once the award was offered..accepted it. Certainly the judge should not then turn around and chastise the awarding judge for 'not knowing the breed standard'. I'm told that in order to promote this colour (of which I have whelped two in the past and have no issues with the recessive colour, but accept it's not allowed and would like to see that change eventually) that they MUST enter shows and do this. Long story, short....would you as a breeder/exhibitor knowingly show a non allowed colour or clear DQ? Would (if this applies) you as a judge do this? What would you as just an exhibitor think if this occurred, and what would you think or say if you were beaten by this dog. Remember, we are speaking of something very clear, not tiny and subject to interpretation (as some of the percentage guidelines are when it comes to things like 'no more than 50% of the dog can be white" for example) A dog of a full body colour, not permitted based on the standard. What if you agreed with this colour and wanted to see it brought forward...what would you do to help promote that change? Looking for mature conversation please.

Ch.Wiesenland Royal Velvet [A][Z] whelped four lovely babies April 1st. Two boys, two girls. We're very pleased with the quality and all are spoken for.

I have had two breeds for years...always in different groups...I can see why here, with the way shows are run, you would be better to stick to one group, but it's not impossible, just need to prioritize when it comes to showing (or not have breeds starting with the same letter in different groups!) Anyway...the thought that there are people that should not have more than one breed because they can not do both justice is absolutely absurd as far as I"m concerned....Why would we assume that people do not have the mental ability or talent to learn about more than one breed at a time? I see many out there that I think truly believe that their breed is in fact the ONLY breed out there..they know NOTHING about any other breed, nor barely know what breeds fit in what groups....to me, that's not doing justice to their breed. People that stretch their minds and work on two or more breeds successfully, have a far better overall knowledge base to draw from. They aren't stuck in the misconception that the one breed is unique or special or unlike any other breed (sorry to burst bubbles, but your breed isn't as unique as you may think it is.....another breed can have all the same qualities, but since you don't know anything about any other breed...you can't realize that fact) I have seen over the years, many people do multiple breeds with huge results....limited breeding, careful planning and simple good dog ownership and hard work. Yes, they get grief by the 'single breed breeders' out there...but perhaps it's a case of jealousy...that single breed breeder can't multi task and therefore the green eyed monster rears up....lashes out in a breeder bashing of sorts.

What's the point then? I thought these events were designed for the public first?