Souff

Gee whiz: "Dogs with docked tails were significantly less likely to sustain a tail injury; however, approximately 500 dogs would need to be docked in order to prevent one tail injury. " I got a swine flu shot a while back, because I had a 1 in umpteen thousand chance of catching the swine flu. Didn't want to be unlucky now, did I. Might have caused me a bit of pain and suffering. Might have even killed me, they said. Years ago, I got the little Souffs vaccinated against Polio, diptheria, tetanus, and other horrible things when they were kids because I didn't want them to be at risk of contracting something where the odds were quite long, but would have stuffed their little lives had I not vaccinated and kept them safe. Did the same with the dogs too ... and vaccinated them from nasty happenings that in all probability they were less likely to catch than I realised but have nasty consequences if caught. Docked the tails, did the dewclaws .... and they are all very happy with the results because they have never had to feel the pain of tail damage or ripped dew claws. No vet bills for expensive surgery to amputate the damaged tail. No traumatised dog. Anyway, it is official now: This report tells us that 1 : 500 is the ratio for tail injuries. Protecting 500 vulnerable dogs from tail injury doesn't bother me one little bit. Not one little bit. Because the 1 that does get the seriously injured tail is a dog that is changed forever, not just physically, but emotionally. The New Zealanders and other countries got it right and legally chose to protect all of the 500 dogs. THEY GOT IT RIGHT and their vulnerable dogs will never have to suffer because of the stupidity of governments and advisers like this. Souff

Must confess to not having read everything here .... apologies are offered. Souff

Thanks Steve.

Yes, some of us have heard of it because they have contacted us looking to "buy" puppies from us. They of course like all scammers wanted our bank details up front .... fat chance!!! She is about to be fleeced, big time. Tell your sister to go and join the army or do something useful with her life and give all such scammers a wide berth. Souff

Oh Raz ... I am shattered .... all the time I have been thinking it was because they really liked cleaning up after tenants

Many dogs do give out plenty of signals before attacking and these signals should always be heeded. However, other dogs do not necessarily do this. There are many experienced dog people who have seen attacks happen without warning. The dogs get to be known by their reputation, not by any warning signals. If children and dogs are together, why take the risk? Souff

Complacency? Definitely. And very often denial - a lot of people simply think that their dog would never do this! I am here to tell them differently. Many people also dont seem to realise that a small dog can do a lot of damage to a small face with soft skin. The PSI (the pressure that can be exerted) from a tiny angry canine can be massive! Ask anyone who has had a small canine hanging off their toughened adult finger and the puncture wound has gone almost through their finger!!! It can take many months for nerves to re-grow if they have been severed by the little darling. In a child's face, nerve damage can be major damage. You were absolutely right to supervise your children - with EVERY sized dog. Souff

Possibly so, but it is still treated in the same way as any other dog attack in the eyes of the law. If the child or their parents are not fond of dogs, it can mean that we end up with more dog-hating people in the world, or another child frightened of dogs. Too sad. Souff

And this is one of the reasons WHY we should NOT treat dogs as children, or replacements for children. When a baby or toddler comes into "the territory" of a dog who thinks he/she is the ONLY love of the owners life, trouble is never far away. When dogs like this have attack in mind, they give very little or no warning and the parents can be in the same room with the child. They will not be fast enough to stop an attack happening, 9 times out of 10. Message to everyone ..... TREAT YOUR DOG AS A DOG .... DO NOT TREAT YOUR DOG AS YOUR CHILD. A puppy or a dog is NOT your baby, never was, and never will be. I see way too many humans fostering this "baby" attitude - there is scarcely a day where I don't here a pet owner referring to "her baby" or "her kids" and it is an attitude that is rife thoughout the pet industry. The idea of treating dogs as children is a ticking time bomb, and it WILL and DOES go off, with disastrous results for both children and parents. The dog gets jealous of the child, and bang! Children can be physically and mentally scarred forever as a result. Give your dog RESPECT as a DOG, but always, always, always let them know that their place is in a different space to that of the humans. Big humans and little humans are on the top rung of the ladder .... ALWAYS! Dogs and other animals are always a bit further down the ladder. Always. Be fair to babies and little children. Love your dog as a dog, NOT as a child. In doing so you are keeping your dog safe from serious consequences. If you have a spoiled dog (like one of mine) and little children are going to be visiting, arrange for your dog to be somewhere else for that day. You can then relax, the children are safe, and you are not going to be labelled as the owner of a child biting dog that "should be put down because it cant be trusted with children". Souff

The hose can be used with incredibly good effect or have one of those big sprinklers pointed in the direction of the gate.

Good to see somebody not believe all the rubbish that has been promoted by some. Wouldn't mind at all if these anti-breeding people could turn their zeal to the mass sterilisation of rats though, just leave some nice tasty morsels out that are laced with a drug that will permanently sterilise rats. Horrid things that do multiply very quickly and are becoming very cagey about going into traps. Souff

I had a listen to the interview and it was pretty much as I expected it to be. No surprises really, just the same old same old from the gardener. Full credit to Steve Coleman from the RSPCA who took up the challenge to go on air and try to get a word in edgeways in what appeared to be a pre-determined tirade with one who held the "Off" switch in his hand (who, to his credit, didnt use it). I didnt stay to listen to the end of the interview so I dont know who had the last word. It wasn't any good as Saturday morning entertainment - must remember to move away from that spot, its not a good way to start one's Saturday. Souff

Careful now. Troy might not want to be hearing from DB's solicitor.

No worries. I am clear on the fact that other tests may need to be carried out, particularly if the dog is facing surgery. Just needed to make the point that the diagnosis should, imho, be a once only test.

Me too. Some of those tests make sense (especially in a dog to be used for breeding), but some seem like definite overkill to me. Why do a dental x-ray at all, if the teeth look squeaky clean? Why recheck yearly for von Willebrands, unless you're about to do surgery on the dog? Why x-ray yearly for intervertebral disease, if the dog's showing no clinical signs? For the benefit of anyone who is not familiar with Von Willebrands disease, it is an inherited condition where the animal can be more simply described as "a bleeder" - that is, a haemophiliac. As I understand it, an animal or a person who is a haemophiliac is a haemophiliac from birth to death. They bleed profusely and their blood does not clot easily. It is a serious condition if the animal or person is facing any surgery, or has an accident where a vein is cut. As I understand it, clotting agents need to be given and the INR (clotting) levels monitored carefully. Doctors and dentists and veterinarians are treating bleeders every other week for other conditions and their records are marked with big red stickers and the necessary precautions are taken. As I understand it, an animal or a person that/who has been diagnosed with this condition, HAS IT FOR LIFE, therefore one diagnostic test is all that is required. So, if a vet suggested to me that diagnostic tests for the same condition needed to be repeated as the animal matures then I would be taking my business elsewhere. Souff

Just read this on the website mentioned: "It is a practice builder! Results from three veterinarians that are using the system, are reporting projected increases in revenue of $67,000, $85,000, and $125,000 over the next year. Mark Anderson DVM, Escondido, Ca. Sheesh, they aint even $ubtle!!! Souff

Can someone do me a costing on all of the above please? I will then phone my favourite corgi breeder and tell them to factor it into the price of the pups bred from the fully tested bitch and stud dog. At the end of the day this is what it will come to, the testing of breeding stock to this extent has got to be paid for by somebody. In every industry I can think of, costs like these get passed on to the buyer. Souff

:D Happy to help her move forward in that direction, Wizzle ... am totally over all of their lies and spin. Sunday cant come soon enough ...... and then we all get to put up with a fresh round of broken promises. Souff

Tansy, this is rotten luck and an age-old problem. If you research the dogs in the generations behind the parents, you will probably find that there is a dog with serious patella problems lurking there. No point in beating yourself up over it though. If you have seen their vets report and you are of the opinion that it is not practical or affordable for the pup to travel to your vet, you could contact another vet in the owners area and ask them to do an independent report at your cost - with the owners cooperation - so that you can then compare the 2 reports. If it is much the same then all you can really do is to refund the purchase price, which you have said you will do. That is fair. If the second vet report suggests that there is no problem, then the owners need to change their vet, pronto. If there is a genuine problem than the op is needed and at least your refund will be a help for the owners. FYI for future litters, many vets are excellent at diagnosing patella problems at 6 weeks. If there is an indication of a problem then, you can at least hold off selling and review your options. Souff

Nekhbet, I dont know whether you realise it or not, but you and others are mixing up 2 completely separate issues. Issue No.1 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION WITH COUNCIL Issue No.2 MONITORING OF ACTIVITIES One has nothing to do with the other. If the authorities are not currently flexing their muscle with the legislation that they have got, then they should be. Nobody can have faith in any system if the authorities themselves are letting the side down. Targetting state and local government to get them to do their job properly is the way to go if this is the case. Souff

PF, I think the same every time I read an article where it is linked back to the state that some of these poor dogs end up in. Coats that have not been clipped that are a stinking matted mess that has to be shaved all off so you can treat the skin infections and fungal happenings underneath - a very long cry from those that promoted the non-allergenic coat crap. And as Dr Zammit said, they are often a nasty, little snarling matted mess in the corner of a crate - fear biters. Not their fault poor babies, and every rescue worker can tell stories of the volumes of the sad SWFs who were brought into the world by the wrong people, and then were sold to the wrong people - people who did not keep up the necessary daily grooming. The health problems of many of these badly bred little SWFs were, and I am sure still are, appalling. Hearts that sounded like washing machines, knees that dislocated constantly instead of working, eye problems, incontinence, ill fitting jaws .... the list goes on. I don't agree with this article on one point though ... as well as being bred on puppy farms these are also a very, very popular choice of backyard breeders, particularly the smaller sized dogs. Souff

Fair enough. I do hope that the dog breeding clubs of Victoria can get somebody there to counter Hinch, if he is coming from where I think he will be coming from. As far as I know he is not a politician but an aging Melbourne radio "personality" who loves publicity. Rather like PETA actually. I hope good Victorian dog breeders can stand up and loudly say that there IS a better way and that is that all breeders must be registered so they are at least VISIBLE and can be regulated. It is not the ideal, but it is better than anything that Australia currently has .... we are a country where anyone can put two dogs together, no matter what the consequences. Shame, shame, shame. Souff edited for s & g

Anyone who thinks that is not already happening is deluding themselves. As I said earlier in this thread BALANCE is needed and there needs to be sane, sensible people at this rally to provide that balance, people who can get the message across that there IS A BETTER WAY OF BREEDING DOGS than what happens at puppy farms and that good breeders are NEEDED to PRESERVE dog breeds before gene pools of some breeds in this country reach dangerously low levels. I am not convinced that either of the speakers mentioned are those people. Souff

Thank you Aloysha, that is a very good description of a "puppy farm" and the RSPCA are to be commended for that description. It would be interesting to know if the organisers of the rally that Pam is promoting will be using the same description. Souff

Yes, sad as it is, it might be time for Troy and the other mods to consider putting the site back to a breeders site. It has certainly been undermined. Souff