shortstep

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/peterwedderburn/100035662/should-the-rspca-be-the-pet-police-or-animal-carers/ Pete Wedderburn Pete Wedderburn qualified as a vet twenty-five years ago, and now spends half his working life writing newspaper columns. He lives in Ireland with his wife, two daughters and a menagerie of dogs, cats, poultry and other furry and feathered companions. Pete answers readers' queries about their pets' health in his video Q&A – he is also on Twitter as @petethevet and has a Facebook Fan Page. Should the RSPCA be the 'pet police' or 'animal carers'? By Pete Wedderburn Health and lifestyle Last updated: April 21st, 2010 14 Comments Comment on this article The RSPCA has an illustrious history, as the oldest and largest animal welfare organisation in the world. The organisation has been respected and loved by the British public, but the latest news story puts its role under the microscope, and forces us to ask the question: what do people want the RSPCA to do? Should the focus be on helping unwanted animals, or on prosecuting cases of cruelty or neglect? It’s clear that the RSPCA has made up its mind: the decision to stop taking in unwanted pets is described as “streamlining and prioritising of finite resources”. The more important priority is to be animal rights enforcement. There’s nothing new about this focus: this was the primary aim of the charity when it was set up, back in 1824. One of the first pieces of legislation on animal welfare had just been passed by parliament – the Cruel Treatment of Cattle Act 1822 – but it was felt that the judiciary system was unwilling to enforce the new laws effectively. The RSPCA was established to publicise and to enforce the new Act. Over the years, the role of the RSPCA has diversified, extending into animal rescue and care across all of society. It’s a charity that offers remarkable support to the animals of England and Wales, paying vets to treat sick and injured wildlife and strays, and attending to call-outs from the public wherever there’s an animal in trouble. This level of service is taken by granted by the public: in most other countries these animals need to fend for themselves, depending only on the goodwill of the public in the place where they’re found. The high level of service offered by the RSPCA has ensured that they have commanded widespread support from the public, allowing the charity to operate without any state funding, surviving solely on private donations. Now, over 180 years after it was established, the RSPCA has encountered a new challenge: the Animal Welfare Act 2006, the most significant change in animal welfare legislation in almost a century. It’s surely not a coincidence of timing that the new codes of practice for welfare of dogs, cats, horses and primates have just come into force, on 6th April 2010. These codes can be used in courts as evidence in cases brought before them relating to poor welfare. Do you think the hard-pressed police force will have the appetite to pursue suspected cases of cruelty under the new Act? So it’s back to 1824, with the RSPCA planning to do exactly what it was set up to do in the beginning: to publicise and to enforce the new legislation. RSPCA inspectors may resemble police officers, but they’re normal civilians, with no special rights or statutory powers. The charity achieves convictions through private prosecutions, paying for independent expert opinions and employing private solicitors. The charity aims to uphold the law of the land on animal welfare, prosecuting 2000 cases per year, with a 97% success rate. What would happen if the RSPCA did not take this action? Many suspect that animal welfare legislation would be virtually ignored by state authorities who are under pressure to fulfill other duties. Meanwhile, as part of its ongoing commitment to care for animals, the charity will continue to help in diverse ways across the land. OK, so it may stop accepting pets from people who’ve decided that their lifestyle doesn’t suit pet-owning after all, but this has always only been a small part of the wide range of tasks undertaken. If you donate money to the RSPCA, where do you want that money to go? Do you want to pay for boarding of pets that feckless people have rejected? Or do you want to ensure that the law of the land on animal welfare is enforced? Worth reading the comments people have made on the web site link above.

I have read here in a couple of posts that HD is or can be caused by other factors rather then inheritance. This is not what I understand to be the situation. The current thinking is that there are multiple genes involved in HD. These genes fall into two categories. The first category. Some of the genes will be direct causes, such as a gene that might cause the joint to be subluxed (loose fitting), a gene that caused the pup to absorb too much or lay down calcium incorrectly or the deformed bones found in breeds that carry the dwarf gene, and likely several more. The second category. Then there are other genes will be in the form of traits that cause risk, these are known as risk factors, but be clear they are genes. These genes can be for giant size, genes for rapid growth, genes that cause early maturing, genes that cause the dog to carry more weight especially in youth, reckless temperament, and likely several more. For a dog to get HD, it has to have some if not all of the genes from the first category that directly cause the deformity to the joint. If they do not have these genes then they cannot get HD. However, the severity of HD can also be affected by the risk factor genes in the second category. These genes can make HD more or less severe. This is where the first year of life is important, as we can influence some of these risk genes. For example a dog that has a risk gene to grow rapidly and to grow very large, if fed correctly can slow down this growth and reduce the risk of severe HD or if feed incorrectly can cause the dog to grow even faster, carry extra weight and increasing the over all size, all increasing the risk of severe HD symptoms. However, the dog MUST have the genes that cause the deformities of the joint for it to get HD. A dog without these genes for the deformities of the joint will not get HD no matter how it is fed or raised (not considering injuries to the joint). By proper rearing, we can in effect mask or lessen the severity of HD symptoms in the dog that does have the genes for the disease. This might make the difference between mild HD and borderline HD, or severe HD and mild HD and it can also make the difference between 0-0 hips and 3-3 hips. I think breeders need to keep this in mind when reviewing hip scores on potential breeding lines, that good rearing can improve scores and poor rearing can lower scores. But in the end, you can not cause a dog to have HD by poor rearing that does not already have the genes for the deformities to the joint. They have already found a couple of genes involved and more is on the way soon.

Just wanted to comment on this. I will start from the premise that the breeder wants to do the right thing. It has been a standard rule of thumb, if you get a score that is getting close to not acceptable in your breed at 12 months of age, that you re x-ray again at after 2 years of age to make sure the hips have stayed in the acceptable range. However, if you get a score in a the lower numbers, meaning 10 or under and no area of high scores, then this dog is not going to have big enough changes to become dysplastic over the next year. It is possible it might get a few more points but not enough to affect the opinion on the hips. the benefit of screening early far out weights the risk of not catching those few dogs with borderline scores that got worse (and their breeder should have retested anyway). The benefit for the breeder who has an active screening program is great and vital. They need to look at all offspring as soon as possible before breeding the parent dogs again. They (Cornell Uni) have even come up with a test that can be used at 8 months of age that is 98% accurate in the normal range if repeated at 3 years. The whole reason for developing this test was to allow screening offspring ASAP to prevent breeding more affected dogs and to allow moving forward with all the information needed. Now if the breeder is not doing an active prevention and screening program, so they are not looking at all of their offspring hips prior to breeding the parents again, then it make no difference by increasing the age of screening anyway, does it? Edited to add, only a handful of ANKC breeds have any restrictions on hip or elbow scoreing or breeding score directives.

I am so sorry to have read your post, how sad for you and your dog. However do keep positive, as there are many treatments, medications and supplements that can really help change the outcome of both of these diseases. I have not read all the answers. I will just address what I think is the general bottom line on the subject of giant breeds and HD and ED. There is no surprise in this situation. All most all giant breeds have rather high rates of ED and HD, it is no secret. Some breeds as high as 70% are affected and many giant breeds run around 1 in 3 affected. So a common problem in giant breeds and in some breeds can almost be said to be expected. I think if someone buys a giant breed knowing that they have a very high risk of getting a dog with severe joint problems, then they really can't blame the breeder. In reality they took a chance and they knew what the chances were that come along with the breed. However I would also expect for the breeder to have given them the % rates of affected dogs for both hips and elbows for the breed in writing. I would also expect to see an exceptionally aggressive screening program for HD and ED, meaning not just the parents screened but their siblings and all of their offspring and all this information presented to the buyer. I would expect to also see them breeding for smaller, lighter boned and lighter weight dogs that would have less risk and if not then in writing to inform the buyers that large size and rapid growth increase the risks. Also extensive details on how to feed the dog for the first 18 months of it's life to slow down growth and how to keep calcium below 1%. they also need to say what if anything they will do if the dog gets HD or ED. (And while talking about giant breeds and risks, also breeding for low family history of cancer another disease often found in high rates in many large breed dogs and for increased longevity due short life span being common in many large breeds.) If they are doing all these things then they have done all they can do to reduce the risk and to inform the buyer, the buyer took their chances knowing the risks. If however they are not doing these things (and most important did not give the buyer in writing the % of affected dogs in the breed for HD and ED, cancer and average death age), then I feel they failed to notify the buyer of the health risks in the breed.

"Lie down with dogs and expect to get fleas" ??? Our buddy, purebred dog savior? and not to be confused as an animal rights extremist Jememia Harrison, speaks at the H$U$ conference. Are the coffers low so it is a case of one must do what one must do? No I think not. True believers are so caught up in their mission to save the world, that they will do just about anything to shove their personal dreams down everyone else's reality throats. Including laying down with dogs and getting up just covered in fleas. Jememia has had some real success in the UK and Australia is sure to follow along obediently. But her home the USA and the AKC have not paid much attention despite her best efforts. What she needs is big money and big organizations such as H$U$ that can put up the money and publicity to get things done in the USA and AKC. Who cares about getting fleas if that is what it takes, eh? http://pedigreedogsexposed.blogspot.com/2011/04/purebred-paradox-to-go-or-not-to-go.html Then we have those at the H$U$, animal rights extremist, does it matter? Depends only on who they are asking for a donation at the time. Vegans please help us enlighten the world? Committed animal rights folks opposed to domestic animal ownership and use? Or just concerned folks who really want us to think they fund that animal shelter down the road (that they have nothing to do with), so please buy our books and donate more money to so we can 'save animals'? Simply what ever they are pretending to be at the moment, but what we do know for sure is they certainly do know how to raise money. Valued at over 200 million! and an active funder of PETA. http://terriermandotcom.blogspot.com/2011/04/hsus-donors-are-flushing-their-money.html Then throw in the UK RSPCA for a good roll to pick up even more fleas, and hope the pot is sufficiently stirred in the USA. http://www.politics.co.uk/opinion-formers/press-releases/animal-welfare/rspca-urgent-action-on-dog-health-is-also-needed-in-the-united-states-$21388554$366366.htm RSPCA: Urgent action on dog health is also needed in the United States Pedigree dog health and welfare is the focus of leading scientists and animal welfare experts at an international conference in Washington DC, co-sponsored by the RSPCA. The Humane Society Institute for Science and Policy, part of the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), is organizing the conference and chose pedigree dog breeding as its subject because they believe it is an urgent animal welfare issue in the USA. Read link for more. And what to make of this, I am confused. From reading the information on your post, you a committed vegan, a dog show judge and Saint Bernard breeder. A breed listed on the top 15 hit list of pedigreed dog breeding welfare concerns thanks to the RSPCA, Jememia and now H$U$. Sending your money to buy a book written by someone who had never owned a pet dog in his life, and this money will help line the pockets of the U$H$ folks who are bent on destroying your Saint breed and your dogs shows at the very least and most would say they have a lot more in mind than just that. Whiskey Tango Foxtrot? Well lets see what has been said recently about Saints. Ah yes, concerning the breed standard changes on height not being enough. As it does not set a upper limit only a lower limited (opps they missed point I guess). Bigger is not better.... The Berne Natural History Museum in Switzerland has extensive data on the St Bernard dating back to the 1800s. The UK breed standard for the St. Bernard now specifies a minimum shoulder height of 75cm (30in) for dogs and 70cm (27.5in) for bitches and they weigh 65-85kg (143-187lb). But a typical 19th century dog was approximately 60 cm (20in) high and weighed less than 50 kg (110lb) . It is a huge increase. http://pedigreedogsexposed.blogspot.com/2011/04/bigger-is-not-always-better.html I read today an idea presented that all breeds that have less than 100 pups born a year be removed from the KC's stud books. They be assigned to a seperate registry for endangered breeds where there is oversight by a board to direct the breeding programs, either to restore the breed or to control what happens as it fades out. Now there's just a dandy idea and certainly looking towards the future. Happy reading.

yes they were and I can not find it now, it is gone. I cannot really get around DOL right now, still trying to figure out how to use the new system LOL. However if you can search my posts, I did post the AVA breed averages scores link a couple of times recently. It maybe the link will still work even if they have taken if off their web site.

ANKC breeder's pups have to be at least 11 weeks to fly international. Be sure to tell shipper the breeder is ANKC as the shipper will not assure/protect that the ANKC breeders are following the ANKC Code of Ethics and the breeder can be punsihed by ANKC for failing to comply with the Code of Ethics. All other breeders of purebred dogs or none purebred dogs must follow the state and national laws, ask the shipper for exact details, the shipper will make sure these breeders do not violate the law.

The Australian Veterinary Association has welcomed Ms Cameron's commitment, but warned subsidised clinics needed to be well-managed to avoid "bad blood" with private vets, and tightly focused to avoid abuse. "If people with a Mercedes come and get it done because it's a cheaper option, then that money generated by fundraising or subsidisation is wasted," said AVA past president Mark Lawrie. Ask me the cost of vet care (for everything) is well above what it should be. As if not already making heaps, now the AVA warns Ms Cameron to protect the vets so they get charge inflated rates to anyone they think can afford pay the inflated rates. Get real, what is needed is compitition not price controls. I have a better idea, they want controlled priceing, how about we make a law that any amount collected by a vet over the cat 94/dog 194 rate has to be dontated to this fund. Ha.

Amazing how the dog world can be so out of touch with it's self. Well with the term Ethical breeder bantered about as if meaningful, it may well be that leaving decisions on vaccination timing up to breeders is far too risky when considering a code of ethics. All kidding aside, as far as I know it may be a NSW state law that is reflected in the Code of Ethics and not something Dogs NSW came up with.

Dogs NSW Code of Ethics has a rule about this. Not sure about the other states. 6. A Member shall not sell or otherwise transfer from that member's care any puppy under 8 weeks of age, thus allowing for the vaccination which must be given at 6 weeks of age, and for the nesessary 10 to 14 days for the vaccine to take effect. So if you want to place your pups at 8 weeks then you need to give shots at least 10 days prior. If you want to vaccinate at 8 weeks then the pup can not leave until 10 days later.

Red Nose was / is a certain line of american pits. here is a bit about it http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Family_Red_Nose

From what I have been reading that is very true. That has to do with the FCI only kennel clubs, as there are not a lot of working setters (either type) except for some pockets of populations in a few FCI countries. It seams they want to consentrate on the working side of the breed.

International Outcross Programme for Irish Red Setters & Irish Red & White Setters INTERNATIONAL OUTCROSS PROGRAMME FOR IRISH RED SETTERS & IRISH RED & WHITE SETTERS It is envisaged that any Irish Red Setter or Irish Red & White Setter from an FCI Country and a National Kennel Club which the IKC approves of could be used in this programme. The reason the club suggests that this programme be confined to FCI countries or such National Kennel Club is that agreement in regards to an Outcross Programme would have to be a binding document. As this is an International Outcross Programme the Irish Red & White Setter Club recommends that this would be run with the co-operation of the Irish Red Setter Club and the National Kennel Club of that Country, the Irish Kennel Club and the Irish Red & White Setter Club. A formal agreement between the two participating Kennel Clubs. Rules & Regulations for an International Outcross Programme. All Irish Red Setters and Irish Red & White Setters, which are proposed to be included in this Outcross Programme would have to be approved by the Outcross Committee. All Irish Red Setters included in this programme would have to have the appropriate health certificates in regards to Canine Leucocyte Adhesion Deficiency, CLAD and a Hip Dysplasia certificate. All Irish Red & White Setters would require the same certificates plus a certificate in regards to being von Willebrands free. In regards to testing Irish Red & White Setters for von Willebrands disease, CLAD & Hip Dysplasia the Irish Kennel Club will recommend a Veterinary Surgeon approved by them to carry out this procedure. The details of all the dogs’ pedigrees, health certificates and all other relevant documents must be presented to the committee four months prior to any mating. Any deviation on this matter must have the approval of the committee. The Irish Red & White Setter Club is aware that some ‘Irish Red Setters FDSB’ were imported from America and were mated with Irish Red Setters in Europe . This American Red Setter breeding is not recognised by the American Kennel Club as Irish Red Setters or by the Irish Kennel Club and the Irish Red Setter Club is totally opposed to having dogs with such breeding being introduced to the Irish Red Setter gene pool. We are aware that these dogs were crossed with English Setters in the past. Under no circumstances can any dog with such pedigrees be used in any part of the Outcross Programme. The Irish Red & White Setter Club proposes that all dogs participating in the Outcross Programme would be micro-chipped for identification. It is also proposed that any resulting pups may be DNA tested at the request of the Outcross Committee. This would have to be part of any signed agreement entered into by all participants in the Outcross Programme. Registration of Resulting Pups from Outcross. We would propose that any Irish Red & White Setter bitch from Ireland , which is mated to an Irish Red Setter outside Ireland or inseminated with imported semen, could have the litter here in Ireland and the resulting pups would be registered by the Irish Kennel Club as Irish Red & White Setters. This would be of great help to the breed as we would not have to wait at least ten months to have the pups rabies vaccinated etc before they could be imported here to Ireland to have them registered under the reciprocal registration agreement between FCI countries. If there are no pups with red and white markings the club would propose that some of the pups could be registered as ‘Irish Red & White Setter - mismarked red’. These dogs will be micro-chipped and recorded by the Irish Kennel Club. The breeder has up to two years to assess the dog for breed type/working ability and within that time may decide to have the dog registered as an Irish Red & White Setter-mismarked red. This would only be allowed in the first generation of the outcross to ensure that the new bloodline can be included in the Irish Red & White Setter gene pool. These dogs may not be exhibited at shows but will be allowed to enter a Confined Breed Stake field trial. The Irish Red & White Club endorses the proposal that a Canine Geneticist be appointed so they can report on the genetic diversity of the breed. They should produce a yearly report on how the breed is progressing in regards to this matter. They could also inform the committee when they feel there is no further need for an outcross programme based on scientific fact. We also feel that the Geneticist should have an understanding of the culture of breeding pedigree dogs. I the under signed agree to bound by the above rules governing this programme. http://ikc.ie/index.php?option=com_content...0&Itemid=58

First one I met had the most sticking almost dark green eyes, it also have severe visions problems. They are very prone to several eye diseases. I know of several that also had hip dysplasia and it was severe, it is common in the breed. 80% of dogs with a white blazes and blue eyes are reported to be deaf in one or both ears Breeders (used to, have no idea now) cull severely in their litters for deafness and eye problems. They breed merle to merle which causes some of the eye problems and the deafness. (this was in the US). Temperament of the dogs I knew was excellent, friendly and easy to train. I saw no aggression with either dogs or people, but the people who owned them were using them for dog sports (not huntiog) so they were well raised and socialized and may not have come directly off lines that were used for hog hunting. I really liked them. I would be very careful if I was to get one, health checks of eyes and hearing. If not offered by the breeder, might be a good idea to pay for them yourself and if the pup fails you get your money back. I think it unlikely you could find hip scored parents, so at least raise the pup with all precautions for HD as this breed has a pretty high rate at 22% being affected (one in four dogs has hip dysplasia) and this is volunteer reporting so actual affected rate is estimated higher than that.

When people sing Terrier songs http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32bD4VMMzkg and after songs like that is it any wonder terriers forget who they are... LOL

From what others in population genetics say, the island is not big enough to support the dingo long term, that the size of the island will keep the population at about 2-400 and that is not enough dogs to be genetically viable over the long term.

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/environmen...0426-1duel.html Two dingoes that attacked a toddler on Fraser Island yesterday have been captured and destroyed, the Department of Environment and Resource Management has confirmed. The three-year-old girl was hospitalised after being bitten by two wild dogs as she waited for a barge with her family at Hook Point on the southern end of the island about 2.45pm. The toddler suffered puncture wounds on both legs. The first dingo, which was captured and destroyed overnight, was a three-year-old male weighing 21.3 kilograms. A dingo of that size on the island is considered to be extremely large. The average size of a male dingo on Fraser Island is 18.3 kilograms. The second dingo was captured and killed later in the morning. Terry Harper, general manager of the Department of Environment and Resource Management, told 612 ABC radio the incident happened without warning. "The dingoes were out of sight in nearby bushes and when the child was away from the adults [the dogs] came in an attacked the child," he said. "They managed to bite her several times on both legs before the adults nearby managed to scare the dingoes off." Dingo expert Dr Ian Gunn said the attack appeared to be very unusual, even for starving dingoes. "It just seems an amazing sort of situation to have two dingoes run out of the bush in broad daylight and attack a little girl in amongst other people," he told 612 ABC. She received first aid treatment on the island before being taken to Gympie Hospital. Mr Harper denied natural food supplies were dwindling on the island, which is renowned for its wild dingo population. "The research that we have done shows that that isn't the case," he told 612 ABC radio. "The dingoes on the Fraser Island are on average three to five kilograms heavier than their mainland counterparts. There is plenty of natural food around for them." Advertisement: Story continues below Animal activist Jennifer Parkhurst has a conflicting account of the attack. ‘‘I have an eye witness report - the parents were down on the water edge waiting for the barge and the child was behind them playing on the sand. The dingoes were out on the beach,’’ she told 612 ABC. ‘‘The child went running into the bush and the dingoes chased after her. The eye witness saw what was happening jumped out of the car, ran screaming and yelling towards the child, and was able to chase the dingo off. ‘‘The parents were still unaware that this was happening.’’ Ms Parkhurst, the president of Save Fraser Island Dingoes, told 612 ABC dingoes on the island are in crisis. ‘‘It is unusual dingo behaviour and I can only say that the reason was something to do with the fact that the dingoes are in crisis on Fraser Island,’’ she said. ‘‘This is the time when juvenile dingoes get around a bit more. Unfortunately the pack social structure has been fractured on Fraser Island and the juvenile dingoes are kind of like teenagers without parents wandering around.’’ Ms Parkhurst said she was concerned the wrong animal could be destroyed. ‘‘One of the witnesses is very familiar with the tag ID system and he was quite was quite close to the dingo and he was unable to identify them,’’ she said. ‘‘I really don’t know how any particular dingo will be identified to be destroyed. I hope that the right dingo is identified.’’ Mr Harper advised all visitors to the island to be "dingo smart". "Our ambition is to keep dingoes wild on Fraser Island which is a wild place," he said. "One of the implications of that is that people need to take personal responsibility for going to wild places and on Fraser Island that includes being 'dingo smart'." Yesterday's attack was the second on the island in about three months after a Korean woman was surrounded by a pack of five dingoes on Eurong Beach on January 16. The woman followed safety advice and responded assertively towards the dingoes, causing them to retreat. She suffered only minor injuries. Those who feed dingoes or leave food exposed on the island risk a maximum $4000 penalty. Also http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/04/25/3200020.htm Girl mauled by Fraser Island dingoes Updated Tue Apr 26, 2011 5:59am AEST Ambulance officials say the dingo inflicted multiple puncture wounds to the girl's legs. (www.sxc.hu: Alex Maher, file photo) Video: Dingoes maul girl on Fraser Island (7pm TV News NSW) Map: Eurong 4581 Related Story: Parks service threatens to destroy attacking dingo Related Story: Convicted dingo feeder fears jail threat Related Story: Island visitors accused of flouting dingo laws Related Story: Dingo numbers on Fraser Island underestimated Related Story: 'Flimsy' report doesn't mean Fraser Island dingoes healthy Related Story: Woman who fed Fraser Island dingoes fined $40k Related Story: Legal stoush brewing over Fraser Is dingo laws Authorities say two dingoes that mauled a child on Fraser Island, off the southern Queensland coast, will be tracked down and destroyed. The three-year-old girl was bitten on the legs while waiting to board a barge with her family at Hook Point yesterday. The dogs leapt from nearby bushes, biting both of her legs. People who saw the incident chased the dogs away. Ambulance officials say the girl suffered multiple puncture wounds to her legs. Terry Harper, from the Parks and Wildlife Service, says the dingoes will be put down. "We have many witnesses who have provided some very useful information about the identification of those dingoes and in accordance with the Fraser Island dingo management strategy the dingoes responsible for this attack will need to be humanely destroyed," he said. Mr Harper says the girl received first aid on the barge and was taken to Gympie Hospital for further treatment. "There were no dingoes in view and the child was momentarily between adults when two dingoes came out from the bushes and attacked the young child," he said. Dingo expert Dr Ian Gunn says the attack is very unusual. "I am devastated for the little girl; it is quite amazing to hear why two dingoes have run out of the bush in broad daylight and attacked a little girl," he said. "It just sounds totally amazing to me and out of character of normal dingo behaviour." In 2001, dingoes were blamed for the death of a nine-year-old boy who was found dead near the island's Waddy Point. Dozens of dingoes were killed by rangers as a result of the incident.

The attack now starts in earnest in the USA. Being lead by a man who has never owned an animal, refused to pet his girlfreinds cats and has said he want no more cats of dogs every born. http://hsus.typepad.com/wayne/2011/04/pure...umane+Nation%29 But perhaps the biggest dog welfare issue in America is the reckless breeding of purebred dogs, which produces an incredible laundry list of inherited disorders, congenital health problems, and welfare concerns for the animals. In The Bond, I take this issue head-on, calling out the American Kennel Club and other breed registry groups for their mania in valuing the exterior appearance of the animals rather than the underlying health and wellness of the dogs. (I also document their consistent opposition to legislation to crack down on puppy mills and to establish humane care standards for dogs.) Kathy Milani/The HSUS On April 28-29, at its inaugural conference, “The Purebred Paradox,” the Humane Society Institute for Science and Policy (HSISP) will tackle the subject of purebred dog health and welfare with the help of a distinguished group of scientists, veterinarians, and others with outstanding expertise in the field of canine genetics and health. The HSISP conference, co-sponsored with the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and the Center for the Interaction of Animals and Society of the University of Pennsylvania’s School of Veterinary Medicine, will focus on the health and welfare problems stemming from poor breeding practices. Inherited diseases, disorders, and body malformations produce shortened life spans, chronic pain, and a diminished quality of life for dogs—and they land the animals, if their owners have the resources, in the hospital for multiple veterinary procedures and for the convalescence required. Just two weeks ago, Delta followed the lead of many other airlines in not allowing bulldogs to be shipped in cargo, because the dogs simply cannot breathe well with their flattened noses and faces and they are susceptible to death on flights. I love bulldogs, and have known many of these wonderful animals through the years, but they are only the most extreme example of how breeding for certain physical characteristics leaves the animals in a weakened and compromised health circumstance every day, throughout their lives. Until very recently, the AKC and its British counterpart, the Kennel Club, have had no health and welfare standards in their judging contests, just conformation standards for the breeds. Likewise, there were no restrictions on the practice of breeding together closely related dogs. Under pressure from the RSPCA and other animal-welfare groups, the U.K.-based Kennel Club has taken some good steps toward reform in the last two years, and the AKC needs to do the same. The AKC has been beholden to large-scale commercial breeders that pay license fees for registration, but that conflict must not stop this organization from doing the right thing for dogs. In recent years, the AKC has made some meaningful financial investment into research into canine health issues tied to breeding. But this is a dog welfare crisis of the highest order, and now we must see not only the application of this research, but also common-sense principles and an end to unacceptable conformation standards. The AKC has to begin to sync up its rhetoric about caring for dogs with its actions. Every dog lover should be on the same page on this issue, and no one—least of all those in the world of the dog fancy—should settle for anything less than the highest health standards for the animals we love so much.

Here is the link to border collie rescue, contacts. 2 in Victoria are the nearest. http://www.bcra.org.au/contacts.html Give them a call, I am sure they can be of some support or may even be able to arrage a foster home if you need that. I also know a gal in SA who working border collies, if BC resecue can not help and you get in a bind, PM and I will give you her contact. She is a nice looking girl, working bred I would say.

Sorry have not read all th eposts so this may be a repeat. Call him back and tell him how taken you are with her and that you would just love to take care of her, ask if he could possibly consider giving her up. Never know, he just might say yes and be glad not to have to drive over there to get her. Then you can spend some time with her and start to look for a good home for her. Just thought.

You wont get any howls of outrage or derision from Souff But like Lilli, I think you can include ALL breeds in that lame statement. If a dog of any size is not able to walk normally on all 4 legs because they have dysfunctional patellae or east-west feet or other congenital deformities in the legs and feet, then they should be regarded as LAME. It is not just about hip problems. Souff I do not think asking for a working test to given to all working breeds (for registration or for the right to be bred in the KC) is the right track for the kennel club to take. First off, almost no working registires require each generation of dogs to pass a test for registration or breeding rights. Working dogs are bred by those who use working dogs, they already know how to breed them and usually have well established systems or cultures in place to protect and promote them. However in the Kennel clubs, many if not most of the dog born and many if not most of the breeders are not doing the historical work of the breed, nor are they placing their dogs into working homes. The small number of breeders in the KC that are breeding working dogs do not need the intervention of test rule (see above). I think flights of fancy are not good. Reality as I see it is, that the majority of dogs in Kennel clubs are pets and their pups are destine to be pets. That is the primary job these dogs will do. When we talk about fit for function for most KC dogs, that function is pet. There is nothing at all wrong with the job of pet and it is the most important role any dog can have. I therfore can see no reason to make rules that all breeders of a working breeds will be resticted to selecting their breeding dogs based on working tests results. Lameness That recent post on the main page, (dont have time to look it up) was yesterday or the day before on the UK KC report on health, had some very good reading. One section had judges and general observers at dogs shows make notes on the health problems they saw. Eyes had to be top of the list, but also several lame dogs were noted. Why on earth are lame dog being shown in dog shows, and these were some of their top shows? I hope this is not happening here. Is there a system in place to address this? What it is?

Change HAS to come for some breeds because genetic diversity is disappearing rapidly. It is as simple as that. And you are right, no system will please everyone. But it is not a situation that needs to be applied to every breed. Souff I am not sure, I would have said that before, but now I really do think across the board is the only way to do it. First it gives freedom and equal opportunity to all breeders, they can either use the system or not, line breed or not, seek dogs they feel will bring in something or leave out something they want to achieve in their breeding program. I would much rather see this than have laws made about COI and rules that have to be followed to reduce it. However, I also think that if breeds with rising COIs or small gene pool and multiple health issues do not do something to reduce their COI, It may well be decided what to do by the government for them. I would much rather see this, then have rules made by the government about structural extremes which give few or no options to breeders and force change, however if breeders do not start to address these structural extremes now, then we may end up with laws anyway. I would much rather see this than have laws made about diseases and systems set into place to reduce or control disease that take away the breeders options on other parts of their breeding choices, but if we do not make our own plans and track results, it is surely going to be done for us. I also think that a system like this could prevent problems from occurring down the track in 2 ways. 1. I don't see any advantage in waiting till problems occur, to then put in an open stud book system to try to correct the problems. For example, for those breeders who want to keep COI as low as possible there is never a time that new bloodlines are not needed. If you are not interested then no one is making you reduce COI in your dogs or making use the new bloodlines. 2. The welfare issues surrounding closed stud books has been forever addressed, it is now a non problem. Ask me, that is real power. Anyway I can not see this happening here by our choice and design, not the way things are now at least. But if the UK gets this to work, the pressure from animal rights groups and the unis will be extreme and they will drive this through down here. Personally I would be building my own system first and not let that power be taken away.

Hypocrisy of "The Bond" “I don’t have a hands-on fondness for animals…To this day I don’t feel bonded to any non-human animal. I like them and I pet them and I’m kind to them, but there’s no special bond between me and other animals.” Wayne Pacelle quoted in Bloodties: Nature, Culture and the Hunt by Ted Kerasote, 1993, p. 251. When asked if he envisioned a future without pets, "If I had my personal view, perhaps that might take hold. In fact, I don’t want to see another dog or cat born." Wayne Pacelle quoted in Bloodties: Nature, Culture and the Hunt by Ted Kerasote, 1993, p. 266. Wayne Pacelle's book comes out today. The book's cover presents the image of a girl hugging a dog, juxtaposed with the name Wayne Pacelle, and the title in bold "The Bond". My, oh my! What a conundrum. It must have been difficult to find a fitting cover image for this book. Since Wayne, vegan president of HSUS, admits that he has never owned a pet, and per an LA Times article in 2008, couldn't even bring himself to touch his girlfriend's cat, just what sort of "BOND" or kinship can this huckster actually have with any animal? NONE! Obviously, we don't have any pictures of HIM hugging a pet. A bond is a tie; one that you might expect between a husband and wife, or between a parent and child, or between a person and pet. A sort of special kinship that implies an intimate connection. Wayne, when you become a puppy raiser for guide dogs for the blind, you can then write with authority about a selfless "bond." Most of us who keep and raise pets are very familiar with that bond. We live, sleep, eat, and breathe right along with our animals. We care for them when they are sick or injured. We sit up all night with newborns. We train them as herders, hunters, guides, protectors, and companions. Our bond with animals extends beyond the owner-pet bond, to the time-honored practices of farming and hunting. In the tradition of native Americans, we appreciate our animals, and are grateful for the life-sustaining meat, milk, eggs, cheese, leather, fur, wool, and feathers they provide us. Yet, when interviewed for the LA Times in 2008, Wayne's parting comment was: "Animals for the most part just need to be left alone." Does this comment describe a Bond? No. It is the comment of one who has never had a pet, never lived on a farm; of someone who has a rock where his heart belongs. It's the comment you'd expect from one who urges shelters to kill their animals. We'd expect to hear it from the president of the HSUS, a group that lobbies incessantly for laws that make it increasingly more difficult and more expensive to own animals. They work tirelessly to BREAK the human-animal bond! It's the sort of comment you'd expect to hear from the cold, calculated mind of a businessman; a con man whose sole interest in animals is to exploit them for personal gain. Yep. Wayne and his HSUS exploit animals. Big time! To the tune of over a hundred million dollars every year!. Wayne and his minions at HSUS are experts in animal exploitation. And hawking "The Bond" continues in that tradition. Exploiting animals for money! Isn't that the criticism that HSUS throws at the rest of society? Gosh, even MORE hypocrisy. Some things never change. More on the link to read. http://time4dogs.blogspot.com/2011/04/hypocrisy-of-bond.html Important to understand this as it will go international and will be influencing large numbers of people, this book will sell well in Australia. Know thy enemy!!!!

Right on cue! The Kennel Club has already responded to the potential problem of only show type being selected and all others including working bred dogs as being labeled as not correct. They state that trial/working judges can be used for dogs that are of working type or breeding. So I would say if someone is trying to bring in a working border collie( or kelpie or cattle dog) from Australia that is not in the ANKC, that the owner can ask for 2 herding judges to assess their dogs appearance. Herding judges in the Uk would be well aware of what working border collies (or working kelpies, cattle dogs) look like and would recognize for example a smooth coated tri coloured with an ISDS type structure as true to type border collie. Wow, well lets hope this really works! Will be exciting when an Australian working bred border collies, kelpies or cattle dogs turns up in the The Kennel Club in the Uk!

I have to say this was the very first thing I thought of, that in effect it was still the same system of selection based on appearance. Hence the title 'If it looks like a duck'. However I decided to give the benefit of the doubt in their favor. My fear is that people will go to a lot of trouble and expense to import dogs, say a Siberian that comes from Siberia, is used as a sled dog from a line of sled dogs from a family of people who have raised and used Siberians for as long as their family history can be traced backed. Then the 2 judges will say, nope not a siberian it does not look like siberian, must be a cross bred. Even worse would be the case of a dog from a working registry that has a pedigree, even the very foundation pedigree system that the current show breed came from, and they will say no it does not conform to the appearance we have decided the dog should look like. However the bottom line is they will not fool anyone and I am sure that the use of selection based on appearance was not unnoticed and will be watched carefully. The thing is, it is not really up the The Kennel Club anymore, they are against the wall, it really is a case of do it right or it's over. If they pretend too much, if they think they can pull the wool over the eyes of their overseers, it will not work in their favor. Personally I think they will give a total of 10 years (starting last year) for the KC to make some very dramatic change, a change that has addressed and has changed how dogs are bred, what is selected for and how breeds are judged as fit for function. They will expect to see real measurable change, not just words or well written policies that are ignored by the breeders. There will likely be action to end/ban some breeds during that 10 year time period if they do not see dramatic change happening in the next few years. I do not think we have seen anything yet when it comes to going after the breeders and the KC about a breed that they feel is suffering. As it stands now, the ball in the KC hands, it is up to the Kennel Club to convince it's members to change their behavior. Now it is up to the judges and breeders, but do they realize this and just how far this has already proceeded? I fear not in many cases. It is only going to take another Jeffery Bragg type incident to discredit the whole idea that the KC has any intention at all to change. As far as working tests, I understand the idea and the real benefits that could be achieved. However, even most working registries do not require every dog in every generation to pass a working test to be used for breeding or registered, so I think this is not really a fair idea. Leave the breeding working dogs to those who work their dogs, as only they will really know how to breed proper dogs for work. I do not think that everyone has to work their dog/s in what ever the historical work of that breed in order to breed them as good pets. The fact is, most dogs are now destine to be pets and will never do any sort of breed historical work, so why pretend that they will or that the breeder would know how to breed for that work. I think these sorts of flights of fancy are part of the bigger problem and we need to be working in reality. For most breeds today and almost all dogs born in the KC's, their current function is Pet Dog and there is nothing at all wrong with that function! The breeders should focus in on breeding the best 'fit for the function of pet' dogs in the world and be proud of that. The most noble job a dog can do is be our best friend.