Dame Aussie

So Mo has cut his front left foot pad, it's small, say a few mm long. Not really bleeding anymore. We have washed with salty water but I was wondering if there was much else we can do? It shouldn't need a vet but we'll keep an eye on it for any signs of infection. I have paw paw ointment but would it help on the foot? Poor boy Thanks guys

I believe they do ellz, I've had dogs not want to enter a certain room or growl and stare at something I can't see. Poor Roger! I love old churches and graveyards

Why awkward? You haven't done anything wrong?

God some people have no idea, how annoying for you aussielover. I would get a cat trap, usually from your council, and have kitty taken to the pound. Maybe that will get the neighbors onto it. Good luck!

Ours only know sit, lay down and shake hands, to be honest the shaking hands happened kind of naturally, as pups they both gave their paws so we just encouraged it. I like my dogs to be themselves, they're funny enough to watch without many tricks .

Walking our two in an on lead area when we see a group of men with about 6 dogs, 3 off lead running around like maniacs. We stray from the path onto the grass to avoid the dogs as we don't know if theyre friendly or not. Men see us and put their dogs on lead and one calls over "Why dont you walk on the path, dogs have to be on lead"....ummmm so why wasn't yours idiot??? Proceed to tell us that we should walk the dogs on this type of harness and only on this side of the body and a myriad of other useless bullsh*t......they're members of a local obedience group.....I tell you what, if they're the supposedly responsible owners we have no chance.

That's a hard one Kirty, one of my two acts very submissive but is actually a scheming little piece of work Would be hard to say without seeing the dog but I don't think submissiveness necessarily always indicates fear. However, if she hasn't been socialised at all it could be more than possible she is scared.

Yeah I think I'll ask them, that's the thing they love people, they just don't love "strange" people making loud noise

Thanks Souff, we are at home when they do it. As the other poster said whenever we let them out for a pee they just go off. Normally they can't see the builders, they can just hear them. Its not too much of a nusaince now as whenever they bark I stop them immediately, but I just worry about sometime having to leave them outisde and it being a nuisance.

Agree completely aussielover. Very frustrating

Hey all, Just after ideas to nip some barking in the bud. Next door is having their house renovated/restumped and both the dogs have been barking at the builders a lot. We are going to put up some bamboo sheeting on the fence to raise it a bit higher in the hopes that if they cant see them they might give up on it? Does anyone know of any ways to train them out of it or have any other suggestions? Thanks guys

Normal businesses generally don't send staff around to check out peoples living arrangements either. But if they do send staff out, they are covered by public liablity insurance. This is a genuine question.......are rescue organisation employees covered by the same? If they are carrying out their business on private property, I would think they'd have to be. My dogs definitely get more than one hours attention a day, in fact I'd go so far as to say they get a lot more attention than some dogs where the owner is home all day. They come inside when we're home, they sleep in our room, we bought a property because it was more suited to the dogs than our previous place. Dogs need more than exercise, and mine definitely that and more. Every house we rent is a sh*thole because we get it for the dogs, not us, huge backyards don't seem to come with nice new houses We make many sacrifices to keep our dogs happy and healthy and these far outweigh any negativity that comes along with working full time.

I'm sorry I completely disagree with this shocking generalisation. My dogs definently get more than one hour of my time a day- they are walked twice a day, do obedience training every day, go to obedience school and have started agility. they are inside with us 15 of 24 hours a day being part of the family. just because someone doesnt work full time doesnt mean they spend 24/7 with their dogs. each person should be taken on merit, not their working status. in this day and age of rising costs everywhere it is a reality that a lot of households have both adults working. if we exclude these families from adoption you will be excluding a large pool of the population and making it harder to find the perfect home as your choices are so limited. having a blanket 'no full time workers' policy is self destructive in my opinion. Totally agree, not everyone who works spends only an hour with their dog then locks it outside alone all night. My dogs sleep on my bed FFS. I wish I had the option of not working full time but unfortunately I have to in order tobuy them food and pay for their training and health requirements. Oh what a shocking owner I am.....

Voted. That is a gorgeous photo of two very spunky dogs

Mosley is an Anatolian x Maremma and he is like this. He is extremely independent and calm. He gets excited easily but his demeanour is so chilled out, he seems very wise. One of his nicknames is Gandhi.

Oh yes, better to be dead than to be in a home where the owners work. What can these rescue people be thinking? If the home is good, somewhere, there is a dog which is ideal......as the maltese cross from the 'rspca This I agree with. We have both worked full time and our dogs are extremely spoilt and well cared for happy hounds

Not this again. Didn't you make this claim in another thread? Certain breeds of dog do not have "rounder" teeth than other breeds. You can't point to a retriever skull and say "ah ha! that's a retriever skull not a german shepherd or pitbull skull, because the teeth are rounded!" There's just no difference in the tooth anatomy. And a retriever can do substantial damage to a person or child if they decide to do so, just like any other large dog breed. Watch a raw fed retriever demolish a carcass and you'll see what damage their teeth can do a person if they are so inclined, just like any other large dog. I understand you like retrievers, and they do usually have nice friendly natures, but making incorrect claims about their anatomy doesn't help anyone. Totally agree. ANY dog can hurt a child, when will people actually get it? The legal and moral repurcussions of rehoming a dog that has shown aggressive behaviour towards humans is huge and not something I would expect any rescue group to open themselves up to.

While ever people like yourself have this attitude the great divide between animal activists and good dog breeders will continue to widen. The dogs rights are paramount in the minds of good breeders. And good breeders also have rights and these rights need to be respected otherwise you will find yourself living in a world of crook breeders and the dogs will be worse off. The good breeders will be gone - in part because their rights were trashed by over enthusiastic people who have not looked at the bigger picture. A bit of balance and respect please. Souff so aussie3 where was stringy's rights?????? dissappeared a happy healthy little dog. reclaimed 13 days later stuck full of holes and two punched out n stitched back up?, torn trachea n pnemonia????? welllllll where were his rights? his vet said he was nothing wrong with him, return him......... why was a fully qualified vet ignored....why was him writing down his opinion before the dog was seized more important than his opinion the day he rang them? even more chilling, the vet was head of vic rscpa before hughly worthlesss.....so if he cant get a dog out of an rspca jail..... who can? I didn't say I agreed with the RSPCA and their view on debarking....show me where I said that? I have nothing against breeders but I don't think it's fair for them to abuse and vilify people who went to this protest with all the right intentions. You can go off at me all you like but telling people they have ruined it for all breeders is just ridiculous and unfair. That's me done.

OMG like I didn't want one enough already...so. freakin. cute

Thats what this rally was about. Oscars law wants pups to be banned from pet shops, to stop websites like petlink etc, to make the councils put their animal reg fees into proper dog education initiatives and to stop the wholesale factory farming of dogs. They rather people go to a shelter or to an ANKC registered breeder for a pup. Oscars law is not about the victimisation of registered breeders at all. If the RSPCA wish to float their own agendas (not surprising really after their previous behaviours) then they're riding on the skirt tails of this for their own ideals. They didnt organise the rally at all. It wasnt about better puppy farms, it was about no pups in pet stores and having NO puppy farms at all. Exactly. I think it's really nasty to condemn people for attending this rally when it's something they believe in just because people don't like the way the RSPCA works.

Have you read it fully. Are we talking about the same document the 117 page document. ok shortstep. i'm officially confused. what is the 117 page document you're talking about? because a lot of what you think should be is actually included in the proposed oscar's law. we were asking for legislation to be drawn up, unless you are privvy to information that the rest of us don't know i think you may be confusing what we are proposing in victoria with what is in place in other states. seriously oakway. i'm happy to discuss these issues because they are important. but i can't do that unless i actually know what you're trying to say. and generally, yes. every time anything to do with legislation gets pulled into dol, we have the same argument. the RSPCA is evil, power hungry maniacs. i am getting a bit sick of it, but i will continue to say, i don't agree with the fact that they have a serious conflict of interest but someone needs to act, the state government has decided to give them that job, and they do it. are they perfect, no. do i believe they can fight dirty? yes if they think it is needed, as politicians can too. it is because they can be like a jrt after a rat that i think giving them the opportunity to go after puppy farmers is a good idea-they are waiting to be able to do it. (i'm not persoanlly 'up' on the debarking case you guys have mentioned, so there is no way i could ever make an educated comment on that) BUT if that conflict of interest is your main bugbear then why not prepare a nicely worded and well researched document stating why this is the case and send it to honchos in police, and members of the upper and lower houses, even the mayor's office. nothing gets changed if you don't try, but if you come angry and full of hatred you won't be listened to. we know it is easier to get things done rather than undone, especially in victoria-which is the state we are talking about here, not nsw, qld, tasmania. honestly, a lot of what you guys seem to be arguing about doesn't make sense when we are talking about the rally yesterday. no-one was trying to shut down breeding dogs, just trying to ensure that it occurs in an ethical way. nothing is set in stone and i'm sure that the organisers of the rally would have loved to have practical imput from registered ethical breeders to help define what constitutes unethical and how to shut it down. yes, there is the issue that all breeders may be targeted if the legislation is not drawn up carefully, a point i expressed to ted baillieu and he agreed. but the only way to ensure that the only 'breeders' we catch under the net of any new legislation is by talking and developing it so that it won't, that process should include registered breeders and their governing bodies, if they want to come to the party they are most welcome, even needed. seriously, i've never heard people bashing regsitered breeders. i've only ever heard the fear from registered breeders that this is the case. perhaps i move in very educated circles? though i admit, i am frustrated that some people on dol get so angry and irritated about people buying from oet shops and don't seem to want to change that, in education or in legislation. it baffles me... steve, i'm sorry, but if it takes your sense of justice to be offended to shut down these kinds of operations, then yes. i think a lot of people will have that be the cost. privacy is all very well but we can't fight secrecy and cruelty without dotting 'i's and crossing 't's. would you rather have your privacy and know that the ability to shut down those people in 'the back of boonies' are churning our poorly bred pups, with no thought for the bitch's and dog's welfare? i'm not sure, privacy is valued differently to everyone, but i reckon that having someone come and tick off your dogs conditions (which i don't doubt are fantastic, i'm not saying you don't care seriously for you animals and future homes) is a small price to ensure that sentient animals don't live in cages and unhealthy conditions (mental and physcial). though i'm sure we could have legislation that doesn't include someone ticking you off, as long as you abide by council and state laws, unless you are breeding more than a certain number of bitches/ or have a certain number of entire females-and in that case, a tick would be all that's needed...? phew! sorry it is an essay! I agree. I would be happy to be inspected if it meant places that weren't up to standard were being shut down. I know that breeders feel strongly about their rights, but this isn't about the breeders rights, it's about the dogs rights.

I for one and most of the breeders I know are people, just like you who love dogs. We are not in business. We have a home and family and live just like you do. We also happen to have spent many years learning about our breeds. We do other things with our dogs and that is what got us interested in the breed. We breed because we want to try to breed a better dog, and most of the time it is to breed a better dog for ourselves. Now I ask you, to ask yourself, would you like to have the RSPCA doing inspections of your home? Would like your family to go through this? Looking in your back yard or at your bedroom where your dog sleeps? Inspecting your kitchen for hygine as this is where you dish up the dogs dinners? The neighbors are looking out the windows wondering what is going on. Maybe they bring the TV guys to see if they can get some prime time footage of a 'bad' breeder? Would you like to have to produce on demand worming records for 3 years, the days you bred a bitch 2 years ago, complete records on weight of every pup in a litter 3 years ago? Would you like to have to prove everything you have done with your dogs to promote their health and safety? Would you like to be liable for criminal prosecution, jail and or fines if they find something they do not like? In NSW if you do not have a bowl marked for each 3 week old pup you have broken the law. If you have your pups in your bedroom for the first 2 weeks and the whelping box is 1" too small, your guilty of breaking the state breeding act. And then you go though all this and take such a big legal risk, knowing you will end up loosing money (because you always loose money breeding a litter). Does this sound like something you would want to do? If they bring in a law like this, then I will stop breeding. I can store some semen and maybe send a dog to NZ. Have it bred over there and get my pup from my own bloodlines from the litter. Why put myself through it, when all I really want is my next dog..eh? BTW I have around a 2 year waiting list for my pups, they are very well thought of and all go to the very best of homes. These are the folks who will be really hurt by this, if all the small breeders like me just stop breeding. But you will have what you want, you can all go get your pups from one of the big breeding establishment that is monitored closely by the RSPCA and government. My bedroom whelped litters will be a thing of the past. Just a memory of the good old days when people not businesses bred dogs. I really don't care any more, I am tired of trying to make people understand. To those who say if you are ethical then what do you have to worry about? The answer is nothing, as I would not put myself through it. Leave dog breeding to the big companies that are experts at passing inspections and meeting state laws and have lawyers and big bank accounts to deal with it. Wonder how much these professional puppy farm bred puppies will cost then? BTW I had a look at someone's (a breeder) web site who is promoting this. They have puppies for sale on their web site, pictures and all. Which is one of things that 'ethical' breeders should not do and they need to make a law in Vic to stop it from happening. Where is their waiting list? Go figure. I don't see what is so bad about anything you have mentioned. If I were a breeder I would be happy to let my premises be inspected as I would have nothing to hide. What's so bad about having to show health records to prove the dogs are well looked after?? Yeah, sure, some of their requirements seem silly but isn't that the case with all laws/councils? We just have to deal with it.

That's disgusting, cruelty as far as I'm concerned but probably not in the eyes of the law. I also wonder what kind of rescue wouldn't desex the dog?? Unless you mean these people "rescued" the dog from another person who didn't want it anymore?

and next time guests come for a cuppa .... do you take one or two sugars ??

Apparently you can just dip it into some sugar too and that helps Mosley doesn't really hump, neither does Lili but my old Chi x JRT had a little turtle toy that he would go to town on ETA: Both desexed