tdierikx

If it's the same woman, then she was done for exactly the same thing in 2018... T.

There aren't many cuter things than young puppies... they are adorable! You've done a great job to get them this far too... the littler one looks really good! Do we have a name for mum? She looks adorable... T.

This is what happens when people get into the industry using only their hearts and not their heads so much. It is being compounded by new laws in NSW resulting in pounds having to offer animals to rescue rather than euthanaising them. Many animals that really shouldn't be out in the community are ending up with rescues that are ill-equipped to deal with their issues before attempting to rehome them - and feeling the need to move more animals out the doors to make room for more incoming. Those responsible for these new laws (Emma Hurst from AJP and Abigail Boyd from the Greens) are now agitating for rescues to be funded by the government - but aren't interested in regulating the industry, as apparently the general concensus is that all rescuers are saints or something and they only have the animals' best interests at heart. That may be true of some, but from my years being involved in rescue, I actually found that there were way too many people in the "game" that really shouldn't be. Animal rescue is now a pretty large "industry", and as such is long overdue for formal regulation. Right now, I could theoretically set up a shingle and start taking on multiple animals as a rescue... with no actual oversight. Who is going to make sure that I don't take on too many animals that I can't adequately care for? Who is going to make sure that I'm rehoming animals with their best interests at heart, rather than simply moving them on to make space to take in more? It should not come down to neighbours having to complain about a situation before action is taken to monitor any animal business... including rescue operations. Quite frankly, the pictures showing the state that animals are living in in that article should mean that no animals are allowed on that property until it is fully cleaned up. It is a dangerous environment for anyone living there, animal or human. The fact that council and RSPCA are handling this case with kid gloves is ridiculous - just because it's a rescue, doesn't mean that the animals there don't deserve so much better... even if "better" for certain animals means that they are given their wings. T.

I agree with @Boronia... given the issues with the current litter, maybe your girl isn't cut out for being a mum. Personally, I wouldn't breed her again. T.

Those eyes.... lol! T.

Sending Warrior my very best good luck vibes... T.

Interesting that SA decided that introducing a new law that maybe has higher financial penalty, but lower jail time than the current law that covers theft of anything else... Only a few months ago, the SA state government introduced a swathe of new animal legislation without going through ANY public consultation processes... legislation that had roots firmly based in animal rights ideology. Is this how we want our laws to be decided... in backroom deals with extremists and no public consultation, or consultation with experts in the field of animal use, welfare, and ownership? The animal rights movement has had over 40 years to refine and remediate their words to give the impression that they are all about the care and protection of all animal species... but the reality is that the end goal is for there to be NO human-animal interaction whatsoever. Slowly chipping away at the established status by implementing small changes to legislation bit by bit is the current tactic. Recent legislation in NSW, for example, had the noble goal of improving rehoming rates (and reducing kill rates) in pounds and shelters. Sounds great, right? Make sure that less animals die in pounds. However, there has been a flow on effect on the rescue "industry"... they are now grossly swamped by the numbers of animals pounds are now reluctant to euthanaise for fear of being branded "killers". Animals that are completely unsuitable for rehoming without extensive rehabilitation for issues that make them dangerous to the public are now being "offered" to rescue simply to satisfy this new legislation. The onus and responsibility for these animals now falls to the rescue industry to deal with, rather than any government department that should be the responsible party... basically, the problem has been outsourced to an industry that is ill-equipped to deal with the workload, but is having their altruism played upon in order to fob off that responsibility. Interesting to note that RSPCA NSW quickly decided to get out of any running of pounds in NSW once this new legislation was passed. Also, they are NOT subject to any of the new legislation when it comes to offering animals to rescue rather than killing them... so they still get to keep their status as the shelter system with the highest kill rates in the land... go figure! The answer to the problem created in NSW is NOT to simply throw more money at rescue groups to "help" them deal with the new problems, as is now being touted by the animal rights groups that had the new legislation passed - after completely ignoring industry body advice that this current problem would be the actual outcome if that legislation was passed. The simple reason this legislation was passed is purely financial by the way... government at local and state level are now effectively absolved of actually taking any responsibility for the homeless animal problem - of course they were going to pass such legislation, regardless the fallout to another industry sector... duhhh! Rescue is a completely unregulated industry, and any government funding of same should also come with regulation and accountability... but unfortunately I don't see this being explored as those that created the problem seek to minimise it's impact. The loser in the end is any animal that finds itself in "the system"... I suppose the moral of the story is to be VERY careful what you "wish" for... T.

Fenced off-leash dog areas tend to foster a false sense of "security" for some people. They think it's perfectly fine to just let their dog off the lead and let it do as it pleases because it can't get out of the fenced area... and thus tends to lead to less active supervision of their dogs. I've seen people (including "dog walkers") pull up to a dog park gate and simply let dogs off into the park, while they stood outside or sat in their van/car faffing about on their mobile phone - presumably on social media. In what universe is that having a dog under effective control? At the very least, they should be watching for the dogs doing poops everywhere (and picking it up), let alone rushing other dogs or people in the area. Unfenced off leash areas tend to have more people paying a bit more attention to where their dogs are at least... even if they don't always have full recall of them. T.

I used to get tinned puppy food and mix it into a slurry with warm formula that they'd been having up until then... that meant there was some familiar taste in it to get them on board with the idea. Nice and sloppy at first, and gradually ease off on how much liquid you add as they start working out how to chomp into it rather than lapping it up. It will be a very messy affair for the first few bowl/plate feedings, so be prepared to be wiping it off their faces and feet... *grin* T.

Go easy on cheese for mum, or any product made from cow's milk. If giving yoghurt, the greek stuff made from goat milk is the best bet, OK? I would stick to feeding the pups the recommended amounts of formula milk for the time being. As long as they are both continuing to gain weight overall, I wouldn't want to overfeed them. Adjust amounts upwards if the weight gains start to get less... obviously the bigger they get, the more they will need, but go with the recommended amounts as much as it is practical. Pups don't necessarily poop every time they feed, so as long as they are doing it at regular intervals and it's not overly runny (it will be a little loose while they are on formula). Is mum dog cleaning them at all? If she is, then that is great too. If you put honey in the formula, it only needs a tiny bit... just enough to sweeten it a tiny bit... so if you are making up a daily batch of say 100ml, then I'd be using about a quarter teaspoon or less... you just need to add the tiniest amount of sweetness. I tend to taste things that I give to any animals that I'm raising, and some formulas are a bit bland or some can be a little on the tart side, so the little bit of honey or molasses (I prefer molasses) just takes the edge off that bland/tart taste and makes it a bit more appealing to the more resistant little ones. Although, if both pups are taking their recommended amounts of the formula without the honey, then I'd maybe hold back on the honey until I may need to entice them further, OK? Does mum dog like raw chicken necks or wing tips? At her tiny size, I'd maybe offer her one smallish raw chicken neck and see how she goes with it, and if she likes it, maybe give her one in the morning and one in the evening - as long as she's going to eat it all. If the necks are to hard for her to eat, you can get wing tips from a butcher that may be easier for her to chew up. Raw chicken bones are not brittle, and are a reasonable source of extra calcium, fat, and protein. If she likes and eats the wing tips, maybe 1-2 in the morning and 1-2 in the afternoon/evening - as long as she will eat them all up. You don't want leftover raw chicken lying about... ewww! Continue feeding her the puppy food also as long as she's trying to feed the pups. 341 grams for a toy poodle pup that is about 10-12 days old isn't too bad... you are doing an awesome job!!! As for the tube feeding... if you had done it wrong that one time you tried it, he'd definitely have been showing adverse symptoms within hours, OK? I'd still leave that option as a very LAST resort given that it can go so wrong so fast if any mistake is made. The syringe feeding may be tedious work, but it is definitely working really well for him as he's gaining weight steadily - even if it's not the same rate as his brother. You are doing such an awesome job... keep it up for a while longer and the pups should continue to thrive... T.

Medicare for animals has already been put forward in Victoria, and I'm tipping that it will also come up in NSW parliament possibly next year... not that it will actually get off the ground and be implemented, but maybe we will see some legislation changes that see a move in that direction for people struggling with vet costs. It's not that vets just charge huge fees because they can. There are so many background costs that are required to run a vet clinic, and the staff also need to be compensated for their training and experience - and contrary to popular belief vets don't actually get paid all that well generally when you compare with human medicine doctors (vet nurses also get basically minimum wage). Jazzy is so lucky to have you in her corner... I have no doubt she knows how much she is loved... and you are doing everything you can to make her life so much more comfortable in her time of need. I take my hat off to you... you are a good mum. Hugs to you and Jazzy... T.

@jjj8I know that vets are sometimes expensive, but when you have an emergency, they are the better option than asking questions on an internet forum, OK? If any of us could have given advice that wasn't going to adversely affect any of your little family, we would have... just in this case the situation was such that only a full physical examination of all of them by a vet was required - if only to rule out possible major issues with mum dog or the weaker pup. I'm sorry that your first foray into breeding has gone so pear shaped, but that is always a possibility with any breeding... I wouldn't focus too much on weighing the littler pup straight after feeding, contrary to popular belief, the weight gain will never be the same as what has been ingested. I would be more likely to weight them maybe every second day to see if he's gaining weight at a reasonable or acceptable rate instead. If he's gaining and hitting other milestones alongside his stronger brother, then that may just be how he is going to develop... no 2 pups will gain weight or hit milestones exactly the same way, but as long as he's headed in a positive direction there, he should do fine in the end. Definitely keep the pups with mum dog between bottle feeds, and I'd refrain from tube feeding if you can get the required amount into him via bottle or syringe... tubing should only be the last resort, as it will have fatal consequences if you get it wrong. Hopefully the oxytocin shot will help stimulate mum dog to start producing milk again, and keeping pups with her may also help that stimulation, not to mention that she will keep them warm and clean. She may stop cleaning them while they are being formula fed, so please keep an eye on that, and try to stimulate both pups to wee and poo after you have fed them - a warm damp cloth gently wiped on their genitals and anus will simulate mum's tongue and should result in some wee or poo, OK? My preference for puppy milk formula is DiVetelact... it works for dogs, cats, goats/sheep, etc... but if your vet says the formula you have is right for pups, then all good. If pup is reluctant to take to it, maybe a very small amount of honey or molasses in it may sweeten it enough to make him more interested. That trick has worked for me with pups, kittens, fox kits, dingo pups, goats, sheep, and calves... so it's worth a try. Has the vet suggested any calcium increases in mum dog's diet to also help with her milk production? Maybe giving her some of the formula milk once or twice a day may help there - alongside her regular food, she may see it as a nice treat, and it will certainly not do her any harm. Feeding her a puppy formula food will also help with added calcium needs while lactating. Fingers crossed little man finally works out that bottles are good for him, and he starts to co-operate by drinking his bottles for you soon. Small mercies that he's a tiny breed and you only have to get relatively small amounts into him... try having a reluctant 20kg calf that needs to get 2 litres in at each feed... that's NOT fun at all... errr! T.

Oxytocin may help stimulate milk production, but the most important thing right now is that mum and the pups ALL need to physically be looked at by a vet NOW. I cannot stress enough how much you need to actually take them to see the vet... it may literally be a life or death matter for the pups... and possibly also for the mother dog. Simply calling and getting advice over the phone is not actually going to cut it this time. You said you were "inexperienced", please just take them to the vet ASAP... T.

Thanks for the detailed reply @rashad... you are definitely on top of everything in that respect... lucky Jazzy to have you as her mum. I wouldn't rule out the genetic testing, as it may come up positive, and then you might be able to rule DM definitely in - and also then let the breeder know that they might need to check on other owners of pups from those parent dogs... I wouldn't rule out the arthritis as being still a possibility for the symptomology. Apart from the fact she's on painkillers and anti-inflammatories that will mask a fair amount of any pain, some nerve damage could result in neuropathy that is painless... I know that my own spinal problem had a stage of no pain but also resulted in issues with one of my legs. A spine CT may give an indication of how much of her problem is related to the arthritis, and how much may be attributed to DM... there is a possibility that she may have both conditions... which sucks, but is well worth knowing if that is the case, yes? I'd expect a decent neurologist to at least consider such tests... One last thing... can you please give Jazzy a cuddle from me and tell her that she has a secret admirer? *grin* T.

Personally, I'd be calling work and advising them you have a medical emergency with your dog and her pups, and need to get them all to a vet ASAP... T.

Or people from their own "fan base"... FourPaws being an animal rights organisation and all... Also, we have no idea what the actual questions or available answer selections were for this survey... the odds that the questions were not open ended is high here... T.

The fact remains that if the cremation service company had communicated the issue with the urn type being out of stock, the delay may have been resolved by the owners simply picking a different one from what they did have in stock... or at the very least, the owners would have been aware of why there was a delay. T.

If you insert the tube in the wrong way you will actually kill the pup, so I'd advise that you NOT try it from watching YouTube videos, OK? I'm a fully qualified vet nurse with a lot of experience hand raising various species, and I'm not terribly confident doing tube feeding... it is not something that should be a first option, the ramifications if done incorrectly are fatal. If pup is now wanting to suck from mum, try the bottle again... you may need to try different shaped teats, different sizes, different textures (silicone or rubber) of teats to find what the pup prefers... they can be fussy sometimes. Maybe a small amount of honey in the milk formula may make it more enticing for him? It is concerning that mum has stopped producing milk... so the advice to take them ALL to the vet ASAP is the best advice you'll get, OK? Just out of curiosity, was this a planned litter? T.

I found a page on DM at Fitzpatrick Referrals (the Supervet)... it mentions Tollers in the list of affected breeds... but also states that there are other issues that can mimic the symptoms of DM - spinal arthritis being one... https://www.fitzpatrickreferrals.co.uk/neurology/canine-degenerative-myelopathy/ Good advice from @Divare the genetic test for the mutation that can cause DM... I'd definitely be following up on that option ASAP... if only to rule DM positively in or out. Spinal arthritis can manifest many symptoms that may look like DM - it depends exactly where the arthritis is, how far it has progressed, and whether it is impacting the spinal cord directly. Just out of interest, how long ago was the spinal arthritis diagnosis made, and how long ago was the cancer diagnosis/treatment started? Is there any correlation there maybe? Did the DM symptomology increase once the treatment for the cancer started? Are the cancer meds the only meds Jazzy is on? Is she being given any other supplements or medications for any other issue? T.

They could have been a little less descriptive about the state pets may be in after they have passed... and quite frankly, vet clinic staff definitely make sure that any post death mess is long gone before the animal is placed in the bag that is sent to the cremation services - no animal is placed into the bag in an unfit state/condition, they are treated with the utmost dignity and respect. This whole problem could so easily have been resolved much earlier by simple communication of the issue (the urn out of stock) - the owners could have changed the urn to one that was in stock, etc... so definitely a poor response from the cremation service there... T.

"The Savanta research agency, which worked with Four Paws on the survey during 2022, received responses from 3037 people across Australia, Austria, Bulgaria, France, Germany, Netherlands, Switzerland, United Kingdom and Belgium to compile the results." Of those 3037, only 247 were from Australia (once you click the link to the report for Australia from that survey)... not exactly a massive number from which to correlate meaningful results. The other red flag here is that Four Paws isn't an animal "welfare" group... it is an animal rights group. There is a massive difference between animal welfare and animal rights agendas. Animal rights groups will also often call themselves "animal protection" or "animal welfare" in order to try to legitimise their stance on animal ownership. Animal welfare is based around the practices we must adhere to when we own animal to maximise their health and wellbeing, whereas animal rights is a stance that seeks to remove the ownership status between animals and humans. I will concede that there are a decent number of people who don't research much of anything when looking to source a pet for their family... which has always been the case throughout history. The paragraph regarding "health" issues in the report is also somewhat misleading... 53 of 247 people reported health issues with their pup - so a little over a quarter there. Of that quarter of respondents, 32% reported allergies, 28% reported behavioural issues, and 25% reported diarrhoea. As we "dog people" all know, diarrhoea is a fairly normal occurrence when one brings a puppy home and feeds it something completely different to what it was fed by the breeder, and that this issue isn't usually a permanent one - once the pup has adjusted to the diet changes, the problem usually clears up just fine. Behavioural issues are not inherently genetic, basic training and socialisation plays a part there too, not to mention that puppies don't come to anyone fully trained to do our bidding, the new owner needs to put in some effort there if they want a well balanced little canine companion. As for allergies, without a breakdown as to what the definition of "allergies" is in the context of this survey/report, who knows what the parameters were to measure that response - but only around 17 of the 53 people reporting health issues noted allergies when you extrapolate the numbers there. As for the results regarding microchipping and registration - which the report says both are required by law in Australia, which isn't totally true, only microchipping is legally required for pets bought/sold under 12 weeks of age. I will say that it is concerning the amount of people who reported not even knowing if their pup was chipped or not though... not to mention the numbers bought without a microchip. Funny how the survey/report didn't ask about vaccination or worming status, as those results would have been even more advantageous to their agenda, don't you think? I think what this survey/report actually highlights is not so much the poor practices of some of those who breed pets, but moreso the fact that those looking to buy a pet are not really thinking through the long term (or even short term) reality of owning a pet... it leans toward a good number of people technically "impulse buying" a pet because they just want one at the time. I would be looking at ways to provide better advice and advertising to educate prospective pet buyers rather than looking to simply demonise those who breed pets... T.

The only compulsory requirement when selling (or giving away) puppies or kittens in NSW is that they be microchipped before they go to a new home. It is NOT compulsory to vaccinate them... which is a bit stupid, but then again many laws are a bit ridiculous when it comes to companion animals... *sigh* T.

Animal welfare issues aren't solely reliant on the number of animals any breeder has. Sure, there are commercial sized operations that definitely need shutting down due to welfare issues, but there are also many at-home breeders who aren't much better when it comes to the welfare of the dogs they are breeding for the pet market - especially those who are not registered with any association, or subject to any codes of practice (the basic definition of "backyard breeder"). What seems to be ignored in all of the debates about breeding of animals for the pet market is that demand is what is driving "production". There would be less need for commercial sized operations if there was less demand for cute puppies and kittens (and other pet species), don't you think? Maybe research into exactly why the levels of demand are so high might be in order here? And then maybe legislation could be tailored to address that... with a strong emphasis on educational options to inform the general public about responsible pet ownership? There are no quick fix options unfortunately, but simply banning certain operations without fully researching causation of the problem isn't going to significantly address that problem... but it definitely makes legislators look like they are "doing something" when they enact laws that actually don't "fix" anything. T.

So backyard breeding is fine? Just not any commercial breeding - regardless any welfare plans put in place? Seems that the actual problem isn't being addressed, just a kneejerk "plan" to be seen to be "doing something" about "the problem"... **sigh** T.

When Hornsby council recently proposed to put forward laws to try to curb the rising number of unowned cats in the community, I was crucified in a Facebook discussion that followed for suggesting that cat owners just needed to ensure that their owned cats were microchipped and registered (and preferably desexed and contained to their own properties) to ensure that they would not be negatively impacted by the proposed laws - which basically was going to allow council to destroy unowned cats that were caught by rangers... apparently the general concensus from many cat owners in that discussion was that many cats were not chipped, desexed, or registered because of the costs to do so. Funnily enough, those exact same people were completely fine with the fact that dogs are required to be chipped, desexed, registered, and contained to their own properties... just that the same laws should not be applied to cats. T.