megan_

The MollyMutt covers are much cheaper if you get them direct from MollyMutt. You have to email them though and can't order direct from their website. They even gave me a discount on postage to help with my order!

I don't have an opinion on whether it is cruel or not but I'd like to know from those that say it isn't cruel/no one else's business etc, what evidence is their that it doesn't cause pain to the dog? Have there been studies where cortisol levels have been measured pre-during-post docking? Heart rates measured? The dog not showing pain isn't evidence IMO, as many dogs are very stoic (egmmy boy continued to walk and play when he was very ill and only stopped when he was so sick he couldn't stand properly).

How many working gun dogs are there in Australia though? I'd happily support the docking of working dogs where docking made things safer for them. I'm all for protecting breed heritage, but there are a million things that need to be protected before tail docking IMO. If you look at pictures of breeds 50 years ago (especially the popular breeds ) they have changed so much. A lot of these changes are cosmetic - more rolls = cuter, bigger chest = stronger looking etc. I've met many mini schnauzers that would run from a mouse! I'd rather we focus on preserving dogs function than a docked tail IMO.

I have a mini schnauzer who isn't docked. She has a nice thick tail (some minis have a curly tail that I don't like). I LOVE her tail - it is so expressive. I can tell how she is feeling very easily. She wags it if I say her name (she's an ex breeing bitch froma puppy farm, so I love seeing her tail wag when I talk to her). My cousin's mini is docked and it can be hard to tell if his wag is a "happy, relaxed" wag or aroused. I find it odd that people would choose another breed just because of the tail, but that's just me.

becandcharch is also really good.

I love the one of Charlie lying on the ground - too cute for words. He is one of my favourite "internet" dogs! I only wish Ruth lived in Melbourne...

Can I ask why the dog is going to day care? There seem to be some great ones around, but if my dog was having one visit to the park and then staying in a room all day, they'd be much happier at home. I have a dog walker visit my boy 3 times a week and he goes off leash with other dogs for about an hour +. He goes to all sorts of parks and even goes to the beach in good weather. He absolutely loves it. I believe this is far healthier for him that going to the park once and then spending the rest of the day in a room with strange dogs.

More long-term than short term, but when Fergus was a pup (about 8 months), I was doing some training with him and it got dark. We were all alone - or so I thought. I was bending over giving him a tummy rub for a job well down when suddenly I heard a voice behind me. I got a huge fright, jumped up and stepped back. Fergus obviously read my reaction and went off (which is completely uncharactaristic). When I gained my composure, I realised that it was a guy who was often at the park. He has a slight mental disability and speaks with an impediment. I calmed Fergus down and we left. For well over a year we didn't see that man and went to the park almost daily. Then one day, whilst at the park, Fergus went ballistic. This was completely out of character. I turned him around and walked him to the car - there were lots of kids around so my main consideration was getting him out of their ASAP. Out of the corner of my eye I spotted the man who had frightened us over a year ago. As soon as we were away from him, he was calm again. And now for my short term example, but this may just be ordinary stuff? We went to the beach a few months ago, and I accidentally threw his ball into some thick bushes. He circled them, tried to plot a way in etc but couldn't get the ball. We went for our walk and I had another ball with me. We were gone for about an hour. When we were walking back to the exit, he suddenly took off. He went back to the bushes and dived in. The bushes shook for a while and he emerged triumphant. ETA: Whenever we pull up to KCC, there is much crying and excitement. We do lure coursing there - but only once or twice a year.

I'm no behaviourist, but when LAT is done correctly: i) you condition the dog that seeing the bad thing that they fear and staying calm leads to good things, Ie they become conditioned to remain calm. Sure, it takes repetition, but conditioning requires that. ii) It gives the dog an alternate behaviour (focusing on the owner and not the thing they fear). This is far more effective than just telling the dog what not to do. iii) You significantly reduce (even nullify) the chances of redirected aggression because you keep the dog below the threshold. This is something that people advocating the "tap" method seem to overlook? Do they think it doesn't exist? Having seen my girl see a strange man in the distance, turn and launch a full-on attack on my other dog - who was doing nothing - I can assure you it is very real. I hope the trainers who advocate this method have very good public liability insurance. That said, I haven't seen any DOL trainers on here advocating thsi method, which should tell us something.... It is hard to describe unless you see it - and see it done properly. The handlers timing has to be right to keep the dog below the threshold. As Aidan's second instance explained, it is not about distracting the dog at all. I can speak from personal experience regarding this method because it has helped my fear aggressive dog immensely. She doesn't like people who look or act differently. There was one man who dressed in traditional muslim clothing that she particularly hated. We can now walk past him, she remains calm and looks at me. I don't need to say "Look at that!" with her anymore (in this particular instance). This is the desired end result - not the owner having to constantly distract the dog everytime the scary thing approaches.

The OP isn't giving their view though - they're asking a question to get feedback. To the OP - I'm pretty sure you can post your question (and respond to answers that relate to your post) in the Breeders section. You just can't post responses to other people's posts.

That's a lot of barking - especially at night

Organise a meeting with the mayor? The local paper? Put all your concerns in writing, and let them know the council can be sued if they knew about the situation and did nothing.

yes. The survey was done by some dog website - it is hardly unbaised. Also, the results were about how much money women spend on their pets vs their partners. The results aren't suprising - most women's partners have jobs and aren't financially dependant on them I imagine? I agree with Crisover though - I love my dogs very much, but they make a very poor substitute for a partner. Loving your dogs doesn't mean forsaking human relationships (including friendships). There was a poll done here a while ago when a LOT of people said they would rather save their dog's life over a childs. Shudder. My dogs are dogs. I love them, spend a lot of time with them, spend a ridiculous amount on dog walkers (even though I walk them twice a day myself), toys, agility etc. But they're dogs.

I'm no expert but they MUST be tested for PRA. It is an insidious disease that leads to blindness (late onset, so young parents can look okay but aren't). Also, steer clear of anyone who advertises "tiny. tiny toy poodles" and teacups. Have you looked though the Dog Breeds 101 section? It should have more info. If I was looking for a toy poodle, I'd PM Poodlefan and ask for a recommendation. Unfortunately, there seem to be a lot of dodgy toy poodle breeders out there - they are too popular for their own good.

LAT takes a few minutes to learn. I learnt it from a book. I have a fear aggressive dog and it has worked wonders- I haven't had anincident for a few months. Before that, she would go off her little face every walk and sous sometimes redirect her aggression onto my other dog. I am not fussed about techniques being positive or negative. I care about them working ( really changing behavior) and being safe for both the dog and the owner. The tapping technique mosses at least one of those(if not all).

Sure. Do you see the same responses? Do you see them play like this when they are in a highly aroused, anxious state? Some of those "taps" weren't little either. I was trying to say im pretty sure it doesnt hurt the dog. His techniques work and save a lot of dogs so i dont see the issue? and i dont see why people find it so *offensive* would you rather see these dogs get euthanised? Those are hardly the only choices- tap or die! This technique has also seem owners being violently attacked the dog often dies as a result. There are plenty of safe alternatives available. Do you know about "look at that"? Why do you think this technique is better to teach people (and remember that is what a behaviorist is- a teacher). I like a lot of his stuff- but in this case he has missed the mark

T seems odd to me that his technique relies on taking a dog into the "red" zone and *then*trying to deal with it. It is very hard to deal with a dog in this state nd you run the very real risk of redirected aggression. You see this in some of his shows and ive seen it irl - scary stuff. Also, the dog is repeatedly getting into this state- it is being conditioned. A far more effective approach is to keep the dog below the threshold - "look at that" is a good example of this technique. There is no risk of redirected aggression, the dog build a positive association with the trigger and learns a safe alternAte behaviour (focusing on the owner). Why anyone would advocate the tap over LAT is beyond me.

you know what really annoys me? When someone implies that everyone is being sanctimonious and no one is :-). No one is saying the tap is abuse. Plenty of people say it isn't a very effective way of dealing with aggression.

Is he kicking the dog? No Do I believe this is an effective way to deal with DA? No. It isn't making the dog any less fearful of what it is seeing. It isn't teaching the dog alternative behaviour (ie what they should do instead of react). A far less dramatic, but far more effective and easy to teach method would be the "look at that". But then you can't look tough doing it! ETA: In fact, if you have a sensitive dog, they could become conditioned: "I see another dog/person and a bad thing happens to me. Therefore dogs/people are bad". Dangerous formula.

A similar thing happened to my neighbours 18+ years ago. They were dog sitting and the little girl tied the dog to the tow bar. People did hoot etc, but it was only when she stopped at the lights that she realised they were hooting at her. A woman got out of her car, hysterically screaming. My neighbour almost drove off before speaking to the woman because she thought this woman would attack her. But she stayed and then realised what had happened. The dog lived, but required several operations and was never the same.

yes Souff, but you're preaching to the choir. The OP didn't breed the dog. Th person who bred the dog would never grace a forum such as this. The OP now has the puppy and is trying to do the right thing. No one needs to sing their praises, but we can all offer help and support.

This is how I define intelligence-the ability to problem solve. Give a dog some free shaping tasks and puzzles to help determine intelligence. I don't think training via luring and compulsion are good measures of intelligence.

Which training centre is he at? Do a search for the name here....some of them are great...some of them have very bad reputations...

Std Schnauzers are generally considered to be very smart and trainable (ie want to please their owners) and they don't make the top 10?

she didn't hand over any money for it. What would you recommend her to do? Tell him to surrender them to the pound? They'd be dead pretty quickly.