Souff

ahem! Australasian Bosdog please ;)

Lets not condemn Dogs Vic for lobbying for its members. Expand the membership and they can lobby for that too. Has anyone approached Dogsvic to see if they will open the Working Register to entire dogs? To open a register for "breeds in development" or FCI recognised breeds not yet recognised in their country of origin. The ANKC is not the bad guy here. Telida, the steamroller approach of governments only wanting to deal with "peak bodies" is what is really at fault here. It is at the root of the problem and it deserves the attention of constitutional lawyers. re Breeds in Development - unless the rules have changed about getting a breed recognised by ANKC, you can be pretty sure that the ANKC don't want to invite more breeds to the ANKC party. From memory, breeds in development required something like 500 entire breeding dogs before they could apply. All alive and kicking. In a country that has probably got the highest rate of de-sexing dogs and where councils basically don't want people to have dogs and where the numbers of people still interested in breeding dogs are dropping like flies. Souff

It is not a question of submitting to the big stick of CC control. If you looked into the regulations of the independent breed registries you will find that the codes are just as strict, and are policed. As far as the ANKC being able to have more sway with government, yes, this is true. And just look at the result they have achieved in Victoria. The puppy farms and the crossbreeding will continue. Some of Australia's oldest dog breeds have been left out in the cold in Victoria, but are treated much better in other states. Souff

Yes, you can only use the prefix for registered litters.. where does it say that you can't breed other non ANKC registered dogs dogs WITHOUT using the prefix?? Decent breeders of purebred dogs use a kennel prefix for their dogs. What use is a dog's pedigree without a kennel prefix - the primary identifier of bloodlines?

Gee, that is a shame. I can think of a few people who would have given them a lift to the front gate - they might have had to find their own way home though.

They should join Vicdogs to receive protection under the laws. There are no restrictions on what Vicdog members breed beyond not crossing registered purebreds. Technically a VICDOGs member could breed as many working Kelpies or crossbred dogs etc as they want without breaching the code of ethics. Pretty quick fix IMO. And not wildly expensive. Telida, your idea is actually flawed. It is not a quick fix at all. Dogs Victoria will only issue breeding prefixes to breeders of ANKC recognised breeds. Fine for Australian Kelpies - but what about the other non-recognised breeds in Victoria? http://www.dogsvictoria.org.au/Portals/0/assets/aboutUs/Regulations%2015.11.11.pdf 4.2 PREFIXES 4.2.1 Management Committee shall keep and maintain a register of prefixes. A prefix registered by a member may only be used in respect of a breed of dog recognised by the ANKC. As Steve indicated, good breeders of other purebred dog breeds that ANKC have not recognised are now treated like criminals in Victoria if they want to continue breeding their dogs in Victoria. ANKC is not the only dog registry for purebred dog breeds. Souff

Telida, Would you give an iron-clad guarantee that the board of VicDogs could not change that situation at a board meeting and make it mandatory that all dogs bred by their members must be purebred ANKC dogs only? I couldn't. You see, the principles of fair trade have been trampled on by the combined weight of the largest dog registry in Victoria and the Victorian Government. Who stands to gain here? The breeders of good dogs who are doing the right thing by their dogs - which have pedigrees that are locked into independent registries? Or the Dogs Victoria bank account? This legislation needs a serious re-vamp, and soon. This is Australia - the land of freedoms and choices - or it used to be. There is nothing as prohibitive as Victoria's legislation in any of the other states, and one must ask why. Is it of greater benefit to Victorian dogs? No. Will it eliminate puppy farms? No. Will it ensure a greater income stream to councils and vets? Yes. Will it ensure a greater income stream to Dogs Victoria. Yes. Sure, it is easy to simply shut up and pay up and join Dogs Victoria. Definitely one for the shame file. Souff

Healing hugs for Chucky

Yes, members of our community now. And they will find no shortage of different types of meat to eat in this community; meat that has been legally butchered in proper conditions and to proper standards. What happens in their country of origin STAYS in their country of origin - when it comes to eating dogs. Dogs are not an animal that are bred in this country as a source of nutrition for humans or other animals, and this needs to be clearly communicated to any newcomers. I am all for enjoying the benefits of multiculturism - but not the barbarism, thank you. Souff

The difference is the varying standards and attitudes pushed down our neck in recent years. Breeders are deemed to be "mutilating" an animal if we were to dock a pup's tail in the traditional way and we will be carted off to court and convicted if we do this in Australia. We are frowned on by many for another so-called "mutilation" - the removal of dew claws on neo-natal pups, when the breeder knows, and the vet knows, that some breeds do suffer terrible and painful injury to the leg when they rip a dewclaw seriously. This does not happen to all breeds of dogs so those of us who choose to protect our vunerable pups from future damage, because we know that they come from lines where this has happened in the past, are made to skulk around and quietly have it done, without alerting the AR-inclined vet nurses along the way. Both of the above procedures were designed to PREVENT injury - not mutilation at all. Yet, should we choose, in some states we can go out into the backyard and legally wring the same dog's neck, or legally cut it's throat, or kill it in other ways .... and this is not deemed to be an atrocity or mutilation? People SHOULD kill animals humanely and there should be no cruelty, and on the land some people have to kill animals on their property. My point is that AR activists, and others who are politically motivated, who scream "mutilation" to dew claw removal and tail docking, can actually turn a blind eye to the backyard butchers of dogs. Politicians likewise - because they will not risk losing votes, particularly in marginal electorates, or losing political donations. Souff

And this, Bill Scott, is unconstitutional. The VCA (Dogs Victoria) is not a branch of the Victorian Government and therefore should not have a monopoly provided by legislation. The money of the taxpayers of Victoria should not have been used to provide a monopoly to any canine business entity. Constitutional lawyers across Australia should be looking very closely at this situation. Heaven help us all if other states copy Victoria's legislation. Souff

Cant say what the letter of the law is in Victoria, but I do know that it was quite legal to kill and eat dogs in NSW, just so long as the animal had been slaughtered humanely. I am not up to date with this subject now but pollies in marginal electorates used to dodge this subject like bullets .... because they didn't want to offend some sections of their loyal multicultural electorate. You should have seen the speed they used to change the subject, :) or check their phones and tell you that they "have to make an urgent phone call now - can I get back to you on that?" And, of course, they never did. Good old double standards - probably still alive and kicking in Victoria too. Souff

Still can't believe I actually sat there trying to figure it out!!! Doh!

Why not? Imho, you most definitely should be asking for him to contribute to the vet bills. Only cowards run away and avoid their responsibilities and your dog was injured by his dog. IGA will probably have a surveillance camera so the manager might be able to help council officers or police to ID the coward and his dog. Souff

Voloclydes, can you do Souff a little favour? Please don't ever again use "gf" in doggy posts ........ Souff spent a good few minutes, after reading your first sentence, wracking my brain as to what type of dog a "gf" might be !!!!!! On a more serious note about the dog, I am sorry but I would have to agree with others that it's designation was sealed by the person who filled out the microchipping form. Souff

Excellent! She might just surprise you at just how good she can be in comp. Go Sophie!!! Souff

We will use a collar (electronic or citronella) for a problem youngster who is just not getting the "quiet" message. But only when we are there to observe the behaviour and to reinforce training. We have had limited successes to the point where the dog would see me walking towards them with the collar and would have that look "Oh damn, the game is over!". I cannot honestly say that is a cure. Negative experiences include one dog almost hanging itself on a gate; fortunately we were there in time. Another dog wore out the sensor on a $200+ citronella collar. Container was full to the brim with the fluid, but the sensor had died. Dog was moved to a country location where she still happily lives 6 years later and where she is allowed to bark at birds and anything else that moves. :D Moving the dog indoors when you are not at home works well. Giving a dog a large bone to chew on is good for the ones who bark when you are at home. A dog who loves its bone is very often not interested in much else, and gee, it is hard to bark when you have those jaws clamped around a large tasty raw bone. :) Souff

Something like this? http://www.barkcontrol.com.au/buy/petsafe-outdoor-bark-deterrent-pbc00-11216/51 Thank you :) We had a similar device and it cost around $100. It worked for about 6 weeks and then it died. Kaput, and no refund. I went back to putting the naughty dog indoors when I left the house, so the stimulus no longer set off the barker. Much cheaper and a far more effective that keeps the neighbours happy. A stationary device (without a human there) does not train a dog not to bark, but(when working)will make some dogs (not all) think twice before barking again. Once the device is dead, the dog just goes back to barking again. Souff

I've noticed this a lot on DOL. People tend to think that problem dogs, hyper dogs, dog aggressive dogs, escapees etc etc all belong on a farm. I think there's more temptation to do wrong in rural areas than there are in the burbs. ;) ;) omg don't blow that myth out of the water.... its how we got all our dogs... useless owners who though dog needed more space and a farm would be ideal... hence we beat every other idiot who phoned emailed or enquired just because we have a real farm. if you blow the myth how do i get another great dog at a great price! :rofl: but i was unsuitable for a rescue cause 6ft colour bond was the requirement. :D Ah, so you are "that" real farm! :D Seriously, there are others too. Several are long standing contacts of Souff and because they understand how most dogs tick, the re-homed dogs have always settled in well. Biggest problem has been snakes. And, just like you, they don't have the 6ft colour bond fence .... Souff

I totally agree.

Those signs just invite trouble. The world has internet now - much safer.

Do you know what RR's were bred to do?

Hugs, there should be no wrong way for an owner to pick up their dog. A dog is supposed to trust and love the one who feeds it. There is something very wrong in all of this situation. I don't know how old this dog is, and I don't know it's breeding, but I do know that this is a dog in the wrong place. The child can be given another dog to love and if this JRT is going anywhere other than the great kennel in the sky, it should be to a country property where it can spend its days catching and dissecting rabbits and other vermin. This is a hunting terrier who would have lightning fast reactions, and from what I have read doesn't particularly like human company all that much. In an environment where he can chase and kill, he will be a happy terrier. You have seen how he entertained people by repetitively jumping off a river bank. The movement of the water and what he could see moving in the water would have kept him stimulated and entertained for hours and while he was doing this he was not biting people on the face. Not all jacks are cuddly, calm little things - the breed is known for its hunting skills and some dogs have more of the hunting genes in them. This is one of those dogs I suspect. Keeping him at his current residence is a recipe for disaster and a whole lot of dollars can be spent on behaviourists without a good long term result. Jacks are very smart little operators. Under no circumstances should this dog go to any rescue organisation for re-homing. There will almost certainly be a repeat of this behaviour and next time it could be much worse. Private re-home to a country property where Jacks run free on the property to hunt rabbits and foxes is the only solution, other than PTS, that I can think of. Souff

How old is the old boy?

When I drive in heavy traffic I often wonder how many of the drivers around me are not licensed. There is no way of knowing, unless they get pulled up by Officer Dibble. I hope all of the b's get caught. Microchipping, registering animals, registering boats etc ..... it is all part of our way of life. I have become a fan of microchipping over the years - it serves a good purpose. If dodgy people don't want to comply then there is a chance that they will get busted. And I hope that chance gets higher and higher. Souff