Tempus Fugit

Sometimes an Italian style plastic basket muzzle could be less traumatic than a cone, especially for sleeping.

I don't think equating sled dogs with wolves in the minds of the public through a website name like "northern wolf" is helpful to their cause. I am also not impressed by Ms Bailey's inference on her web page that shepherd breeding ('It could be that they get a husky x sheperd, with the look of the sibe but the temperament of an ex police or guard dog') - (and I wish dog fanciers at least could get the spelling of SHEPHERD right) would make a dog aggressive. I think breeders of Shepalutes (GSD/ Malamute crosses) would not be impressed by such comments.

Doesn't seem like others have learned: A six-day old baby has died after reportedly being attacked by her family's pet dog. And not even a banned breed.

An interesting thread, but how would I get around the insistence of most boarding kennels for proof of C5 vaccination within the previous 12 months?

Yes - it is a real shame that they all seem to be turning their backs on this to the point as though it doesn't exist. Is it helpful if we write to our MP's with a two-liner asking why the Government won't acknowledge Calgary Model and don't look at adopting it when current laws and laws they've implemented to follow have only proven failure and increased bite stats? I do find that the longer the letter, the more detail ….. the more the Government have to work with. If the Government's letter is relevant in response at all (usually a standard print off letter), keeping a letter succinct where there is no denying or escaping the question less possible to squirm away from (and makes that "squirming" more evident). The government is probably more attracted to the Irish model than the Calgary model.

Does anyone know the composition of the 'Responsible Pet Ownership Reference Group' mentioned in the OP?

Canberra - Owner joins in dog attack

The thread reminded me of a scene from the original movie.

Wolf Creek 2 is due for release on 20 Feb.

Of course if council gets involved there is the risk of a "Dangerous Dog" classification, with the expense of a child-proof enclosure etc.

You've all been taken in. The dog only went as far as the base camp.

In the USA, civilians have been able to adopt retired MWDs for 13 years.

Why restrict the issue to domestic animals? I have been to ovals (where children play football) that are covered in bird droppings. Feral birds have all sorts of parasites on or in them. In country areas I have found picnic and camping grounds littered with wombat turds (which are as big as dog turds). If not wombats, the grounds are covered in roo and wallaby poo and the poo of other ferals. Probably the mayor had a close encounter of the turd kind and is now throwing a hissy fit.

You can strengthen colorbond fences by inserting screws in the top and bottom rails and through the fence panels. You can also use buried wire containment systems on low power to discourage the dog from approaching the fence. I think Steve from K9Pro markets them.

THE Speaker of the NT Parliament is threatening to ignore planned new dog bylaws in Darwin's rural area.

I actually disagree. Unattended dogs can form packs and do things that each individual dog would never dream of doing on their own. They are not only a danger to motorists due to causing accidents and pedestrians due to attacking them or harassing their on lead dogs, but they are also a problem for livestock and pet owners because a pack of dogs will often go hunting together. All dogs need to be contained, even the friendly ones. A friendly dog will often kill just as many sheep, and just as fast as an unfriendly one. ETA: I am referring to dogs who are not under effective control, with or without an owner present basically. I made that statement as I can't say that 100% of off-lead dogs are always an accident waiting to happen. But in saying that I do believe having all dogs On-lead when not contained or under effective control can reduce accidents. Banning people from having dogs would eliminate the risks completely but not many people would find that solution satisfactory. It's all about where you draw the line. I'm in no way suggesting it should be some sort if free for all and I understand your point of view, you just draw the line a bit further than I would. Just by looking in the News section of this Forum, many of the dogs involved in those incidents were off-leash, ran out of an open gate/door, jumped a fence etc etc. basically not under control. We've got to start somewhere and I think keeping dogs under control at all times is a good start. Exactly. And it's my view that you don't need to tie a dog to you in order to keep it under control. The 'average' dog owner is not as talented as the Dog Whisperer. Containing a dog in a secure yard and having it on-lead in public can keep it away from harm simply because it is not physically in proximity of another dog, person, animal or car. Having a dog off-lead just increases the chances of incidents happening. Even the highly trained dogs are put on lead. Imagine if all security dogs were leash-less and only voice controlled. Wouldn't the security companies insurance policy shoot up 200%. Police dogs working crowd control? Just stand by my side Fido. Fido? where'd you go? It's all about taking precautions and we have to take some form of action and do what we can at this point in time to protect the public from harm. But then along comes a children's tv show portraying an attack trained police dog running around the streets of Vienna on his own. So why shouldn't people, especially children, be blasé about dog safety and having their dogs on a leash? I seem to recall even Lassie didn't spend much time on a leash.

From Afghan fighting-dog to a starring role at Crufts

I thought Kingston's owner denied that he had been used for pig hunting? I wouldn't be surprised though if the freezer had been used to store dog meat along with the ice creams.

It's a typical Murdoch press beat up. The Daily Telegraph's MuzzletheMutts campaign is simply trying to emulate its UK counterpart's ShopaDog campaign. The phrase isn't even original.

With a $100 bounty on dog pelts in Victoria it would even be worthwhile stealing dogs from backyards, skinning them and claiming they were wild.

What do you experts think about the accuracy of the information on this web page: Happy Pit Bull ?

How many people think that having to pull a sled with three people (at the end of this video) is OK?

I don't see any need to spread this video further. European horse welfare activists are well aware of these videos. Go to Heather Clemenceau's web page where you will find more info plus near the bottom of the page is a note that three people in the Netherlands were charged with animal abuse in regard to the video.

I don't see any need to spread this video further. European horse welfare activists are well aware of these videos. Go to Heather Clemenceau's web page where you will find more info plus near the bottom of the page is a note that three people in the Netherlands were charged with animal abuse in regard to the video.

I don't think this is right - not in SA anyway. Depending where you live - you can burn rubbish on your place - or not. Own more than two dogs, or not. Have horses or not. Have chooks or not. Build a granny flat - or not. Put solar panels on your front verandah or not. Park a car in the street - or not. etc etc. This is correct & thank goodness. At least we can choose to live in an area that suits our needs & is suited to them. Awful if it was all the same. Backyard burning is not ok in suburbia but very handy in the country. Keeping 10 dogs is not ok in a suburban house with neighbours close but is fine on acreage & roosters in suburbia would drive everyone crazy. I like SA organised the way it is & hope it doesn't change. It seems sensible to adapt the rules to suit the environment rather than just have a rule regardless of any sense. Local governments can make local laws considered necessary for the good government of their districts. Laws can only be made when authorised by the Local Government Act 1995 or other written laws but cannot be inconsistent with any State or Federal law. Which is why there is a push on to make it all state law, for those who live in shires where there is mandatory desexing and the state laws do not have mandatory desexing do you know of any person who has been fined for not having their dog desexed AND if there were fined for not having their dog desexed and they didnt desex would they be fined over and over again for not having their dog desexed? Would their dog be taken from them because they refuse to desex it etc ? By the way the pending referendum is asking for local councils to be recognised by the constitution because at the moment they are not and Since the Constitution is the basis of our laws and it does not recognise "local government", it means that no local council anywhere in Australia has legal standing. In NSW there was a period where some shires were pushing their right to restrict how many dogs a person can have on their property and that was challenged because under state law there is no restriction. Currently some state laws cover things like vaccinating breeding animals yearly but if they were not state law no council could introduce that and because state law only mentions breeding animals they can never try to make people vaccinate animals which are not used for breeding. The point Im trying to make is where dogs are concerned your council can say anything they want but if it is inconsistent with state or federal law it means nothing - thus the heavy try at making it state law. I thought the Queensland Local Government Act allowed councils to make their own 'local laws' and therefore for example, any council could enact BSL on whatever breeds they liked?