mlc

Now you're just plain WRONG! I'm sorry, but this is absolutely incorrect and I can't let you post rubbish like that without correcting you.

That's a bit unnecessary isn't it? Why not come along on the day and listen to what they have to say and ask questions or get involved in a discussion rather than just be rude? Hope to see you there!

I look forward to meeting you too Elfin! We'll all need t-shirts with our DOL usernames on them to find each other!

The aim of the day is for the keynote speakers to be accessible to share information and ideas and answer stakeholder questions that may be generated through such a forum. Also to showcase the dog-related research being done currently by students of the Animal Welfare Science Centre. There will also be opportunities for stakeholder to network (with all speakers/students and with each other) and to have input to suggest future research directions that you'd like to see the AWSC directing resources into.

I plan to be there. But would they share (and take any notice) of a viewpoint that someone is frightened about where their views and research is going to end up? History dictates "control" by the Government of what we can and can't own; what we can and can't use; what we can and can't do. It is a snowball that is gathering momentum and size. Dramatics on my part? Time can only tell on that score. But unfortunately, when we know the truth it is often too late to do anything about it. The pictures of the "building block" style toy dogs they have on the flier struck me as ironic. Not the same as, but along the lines of this one ... I look forward to meeting you Erny! I really hope the various stakeholders can move forwards to a more positive place than the history you refer to. I think the best way to do that is to get together and start talking face to face so we can effectively share ideas and listen and learn from each other. I like the dog picture used (attached) - building blocks and building dogs. Talking about genetics and breeding and experiential effects that make up dogs - not so ironic, is it?

As I mentioned in an earlier post - I think the speakers came together through their involvement with the Animal Welfare Science Centre who is hosting the day. No conspiracy theories please! The majority of speakers are students or researchers within the AWSC itself. Not all of us breed dogs, but we are all involved in research with dogs and many of us also work with dogs and the dog industry in one way, shape or form. The flier has information about accommodation near to Monash. The day itself is free. Any chance you could make the trip?

Mike Goddard's abstract reads: Genetics of Dog Behaviour and Breeding Programs to Improve Canine Welfare The most important step in any breeding program is to decide on the objectives. Since most puppies sold become pets, the main objective should be to breed dogs that become successful pets. Two sets of traits contribute towards this – behavioural traits and health traits – and both of these also impact on the welfare of the dog. Some abnormalities are due to a single mutant gene such as progressive retinal atrophy (PRA). In many cases the mutant gene is recessive so a dog can carry the mutant gene but appear perfectly normal. In some cases there are DNA tests to detect such carriers. However most diseases are due to many genes and environmental factors (eg hip dysplasia and epilepsy). In these cases the best strategy is to estimate the overall genetic merit of the dog for each trait and select those with highest merit. This would be helped greatly by calculating estimated breeding values for each dog for each important trait but to do this would require that a central registry was kept of dogs’ status for traits such as HD and epilepsy. Among behavioural traits, fearfulness, aggression and over excitability are undesirable traits. They are also controlled by many genes and by environmental factors and the best way to improve them is to select animals with desirable estimated breeding values for these traits.

This seminar is not anti-pure breeds. It would be so great if you would actually come and see and listen and speak and participate and be a part of the day. How else will you share your viewpoints, research and experiences? That's what these speakers are aiming to do - share ideas and be open to discussion. Come along and be part of it!

Were representatives from the VCA, ANKC or MDBA invited to speak? That's a question for the Animal Welfare Science Centre. As mentioned above, two of the speakers are registered pure bred breeders. Registered with who to breed what? with the VCA/ANKC to breed pedigree dogs.

Which ones are registered purebred dog breeders? come along and see if you can guess

I wonder why not ? Are they actively involved in the Animal Welfare Science Centre? I think all the speakers are involved with the AWSC.

Were representatives from the VCA, ANKC or MDBA invited to speak? That's a question for the Animal Welfare Science Centre. As mentioned above, two of the speakers are registered pure bred breeders. You're certainly all very welcome to attend.

I believe the Animal Welfare Science Centre executive Jeremy Skuse did.

Two of the speakers are registered pure bred dog breeders. Other speakers don't breed dogs at all. It doesn't mean they don't have interesting information to share. We're hoping to hold a seminar that's inclusive and aims to open up discussion amongst all stakeholders. It would be great to see you there.

I've just listed Kate's outline for her presentation above. Kate's biography is available on the digital flyer - email Jeremy and he'll be happy to forward it to you [email protected]

Kate Schoeffel's abstract is: In this paper I will introduce The Australian Association of Pet Dog Breeders (AAPDB) which was started in 2007 but is about to relaunch after attracting commercial support to develop a professional manual and web site. The AAPDB has been established to assist and register responsible pet dog breeders. The association hopes to attract pure bred dog breeders, cross breeders and breeders developing new breeds. Members of the AAPDB must abide by the AAPDB code of ethics and must be inspected prior to gaining full membership. The objectives of the organisation are: - To promote and improve the availability of healthy, reliable, well socialised pet dogs - To promote and raise the standard of welfare of breeding dogs - To encourage responsible pet ownership - To maintain a voluntary data base of owners in order to promote activities and social interaction between owners - To maintain a data base of breeders and dogs in order to monitor welfare and to promote communication and education between breeders - To support research into the behaviour and genetic health of pet dogs In discussing these objectives I will consider the role a breeders association can play in promoting the welfare of companion dogs.

awesome, McGreevy and a puppy farmer on the same night, that's a must for all breeders to attend Why not attend and see what all the speakers have to say? You can participate in the open discussion and ask any questions you might have. We're hoping to engage stakeholders from all kinds of various sectors and get everyone talking face to face.

Yes, we're planning to use Monash's Echo system which will record both audio and visual of the presentations and they will then be made available online for free. Check the Animal Welfare Science Centre's website after the seminar for links. http://www.animalwelfare.net.au

BUILDING BETTER DOGS: Using what we’ve learned about genetic and experiential effects to improve dog welfare. You're invited to attend the Animal Welfare Science Centre's upcoming “Building Better Dogs” seminar. When: Thursday 11th February, 10.00am – 4.00pm (Registration, tea and coffee from 9.30am, Lunch provided) Where: South 1 Theatre, Monash University, Clayton, Vic. ATTENDANCE AT THIS SEMINAR IS FREE Keynote speakers: Paul McGreevy (University of Sydney) - Breeding for quality of life Mike Goddard (University of Melbourne) - Genetics of dog behaviour and breeding programs to improve canine welfare Pauleen Bennett (Monash University) - Why behaviour is as important as conformation when selecting breeding dogs Kate Schoeffel (Australian Association of Pet Dog Breeders) - A model for an association of professional pet dog breeders Plus panel/audience discussion with all keynote speakers Students from the Animal Welfare Science Centre will also be presenting about their research: Kate Mornement – Monash University - Community attitudes towards shelter dogs Mia Cobb – Monash University - The experience of young dogs transitioning from the home environment into a kennel facility Tammie King – Monash University - Identifying ‘ideal’ companion dogs for Australia Vanessa Rohlf – Monash University - What makes people responsible owners? and Lisa Tomkins – University of Sydney - The Sensory Jump Test: a measure of sensory laterality in dogs Please register your intention to attend with Jeremy Skuse (Animal Welfare Science Centre) via email at [email protected] by Fri 05 February Full speaker details (including bios), map and registration details are included on the digital flyer which is available on request (PDF file too large to post here) from [email protected] Hope to see you all there! 7.44pm Editor used to correct typo in title

Macadamias can lead to very sore joints in dogs - I've seen this in a labrador - usually wears off after 24-48 hours, but look for any sign they're in pain (off food, not getting up off bed) or looking sore/stiff in their movement. Check out the trivia section of wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macadamia Vet info sheets http://www.cvah.com/article/MacaNutTox.html and http://www.peteducation.com/article.cfm?c=2&aid=2411 I reckon sections off the whole area around the tree while it's dropping nuts. If the birds drop some outside of this area ti should still be a lot less they could ingest than without the restricted access.

You're right - that article has just recently been published. However, Tiffani's research is already under way and doesn't just use that one assessment task, she's looking at other elements as I outlined. Repeating a test that already has results in conjunction with other new assessments is generally sound science. One study with one methodology from one place with one group of dogs does not necessarily a solid conclusion make! It's gathering up pieces of the puzzle that allow us to put them together and see the bigger picture. Sometimes different groups find different results that reflect changes in their methodology. Repeated findings over time help to suggest the findings are a sound. The pointing cue task is one of the common cognition tasks in animal cognition research - it's been used with dingoes and wolves and dogs in other research.

Hi Danois, I'm a member of the Anthrozoology Research Group and Animal Welfare Science Centre. A research PhD candidate colleague of Tammie's.

You might be interested to know that Tammie proposes to test a group of pups and then retest them 12 months later. Should be fun! She just needs some volunteers. If you are interested in participating, you can contact her at: [email protected] Another member of the Anthrozoology Research Group (Tiffani Howell) is looking into dog cognition and when pups first start using the social cues that 'engage' humans (like shared gaze in unsolvable task exercises and following human pointing cues, etc.) Lots of great research under way!

Tammie's research project is about whether an assessment can accurately and reliably (in the scientific sense of those words) assess amicability. This means will an assessment prove accurate (remember Tammie is getting owners to complete 3 questionnaires to report on the way they perceive their dog's behaviour) when repeated at different times (test-retest reliability) and by different people (inter-rater reliability). The research is actually about the assessment protocol methodology, not about 'labelling' dogs. It also about how experienced dog people DO ascertain a dog is amicable. Is it as simple as tail carriage, ear position and approach (that can be taught through education) or is there more to it? Do you also note lips/teeth/cheeks/pace/hackles/etc.? Is it context specific (known environment compared to novel environment)? Does it differ according to the 'stranger' (eg. children vs men vs women vs someone wearing a hat, etc.)? Although it would be lovely to have a comprehensive assessment for all elements of canine personality that is short, able to be repeated, totally reliable and accurate, so far the science suggest this is still to come. Logic suggests scientist start by trying to define just one of those known key canine personality traits. Australian's who participated in the scoping survey reported amicability is most important to them - so it makes sense to attempt that assessment protocol first. This project is focussing on adult dogs, because puppy tests have proved (at this stage) unreliable predictors of adult behaviour. Although their reliability improves with age of the pup, the most stable way to develop an assessment protocol is to use adult dogs. I'm not sure where the 'dog in isolation' bit has come from. If you refer to the part of the protocol where the owner leaves the dog unattended for a short period, it's very interesting to see how the dog's behaviour changes in the absence of the owner and in a way the owner may not have any idea about. This is easily replicated in 'real life' scenarios and certainly pertinent and a condition that does exist in reality. Again - hope this helps clarify!

Hi again, hoping to offer some clarification... 'all of these follow on studies' = Tammie's one current research project to develop an assessment protocol. The survey cited in my earlier post was conducted to set the direction for her PhD research. Keep in mind the general Australian public might know what they want in a dog - I wouldn't want to write them off without consideration for their point of view, would you? And again - I feel I need to emphasise that just because it may be different to someone's individual point of view, doesn't make it wrong or not valid. If Tammie doesn't use the results of what almost 1,000 people reported they wanted in a companion pet, then what do you propose she use to guide her? The survey did ask people about their current dog, their level of satisfaction with that dog and took into consideration if the reported 'ideal' dog matched with the 'profile' of their current dog, so it did capture information about successful matches, but also revealed a lot about unsuccessful ones. As do the shelter figures.