aussielover

I'm interested in this statement as an intellectual argument. What about it is unethical? My background is in ecology and evolution and I have a hard time getting my head around domestic dogs - breeds within a subspecies within the species of 'wolf'. Any other animal on earth and we wouldn't bat an eyelid at interbreeding at this level (in fact we'd probably try to facilitate it to maintain genetic diversity). But OTOH, dogs are something that we made, and we need to take responsibility for, so can't really be compared to any other animal in the extent of artificial selection we have performed on them... Conversely, what is the benefit of throwing a rotty into a dobe lineage? What about dobes were they trying to change? I don't know anything about Jacqui's breeder so I can't comment on that. I am also curious as to what greytmate is implying? Do they know what the breeder was trying to achieve and how they went about it? I'm not really sure if they're saying ALL cross bred dog breeders are irresponsible or just some? Working dog breeders often use crosses to achieve a better working dog. Eg. Many guide/assistance dog orgs breed Labrador/GR crosses, many of which go on to become successful working dogs. Farm dogs might be crossed to a different breed a few generations back. While there are many poorly bred pigging/hunting dogs, there are also some very successful ones that are also cross breeds. In terms of working dogs- wouldn't it make sense to breed your two best workers regardless of breed, rather than breed a fantastic dog with a mediocre dog of the same breed? I don't know what the benefit of a rotty/dobe would be, however Jacqui did say that the rotty was only a distant relative. Perhaps the breeder breeds working/competition dogs and the Rotty was a particularly outstanding working/competition dog which is why they wanted to use it?

That ad is shockingly bad Sadly I think quite a few people in the general public agree with the sentiment "don't buy while shelter dogs die" or whatever it is. I have personally been accused of being selfish for owning a purebred by well-meaning, but misinformed animal lovers. My current dog, although purebred is apparently more acceptable because she is a rejected guide dog- apparently this is not the same (and not as bad :rolleyes:) as a real purebred from an actual (I guess they mean registered?) breeder Just as occurs with registered breeders: there are some great rescues and some really bad ones. I think rescuing is great, but at the same time I can see why some people opt for purebreds. I

You really need to put her in a show "stack" for anyone to be able to get any real idea about her conformation and suitability for show. But the pics of her are very cute and she looks very lovable and cheeky!

Look I totally understand how frustrating it is when people don't listen to what you say or get upset. When my dog was in training to be a guide dog I often asked people if they could wait to pat her while I got her focussed on me or in a sit/down/calmer state. Most people were very understanding but you do get a few odd ones. I got told that my puppy was obviously vicious, or would grow up to be anti social, or that I knew nothing about dog training- don't you know that its important for puppies to socialise etc I even got told it was cruel to force dogs to work for humans Just tell them he is a police dog, they'll probably be more understanding

I think you should be a little more understanding of the general public. They don't really understand what neutralisation is, and when they see a cute puppy like Roscoe, they just want to cuddle him, and may be understandably disappointed if not allowed to (even if it is for a good reason). If it really upsets you this much, I think you should just tell them that he is a service dog in training. I found most people very understanding when I told them my lab puppy was a guide dog in training. That is not to say I didn't let them interact with her, but I'd make sure she was well behaved and focussed on me before they did. Most people understand that service dogs need to be treated differently, so perhaps this would be an easier/better explanation for you to use?

My Labrador has a shoe obsession. She always greet us with a shoe in her mouth. If no shoes are available then a toy will suffice, but a shoe preferably one of mine is better for some weird reason. She also always goes to bed with a shoe. Its actually very cute- she carries it into her crate at night and then rests her head on it. Then when its time to come up to bed with me (she sleeps on my bed ), she carries the shoe upstairs and places it on the bed. Sometimes I throw it off, but it will always be there in the morning. She also comes and dumps it on my face and digs me out of bed, if she thinks I've been sleeping in for too long She's actually quite reasonable but any later than 8.30am is "too late" in her book. Its fine with me because I actually feel really tired if I sleep in later than that anyway.

None of the working kelpies I have seen on real working farms have been hyperactive or psycho. They are focussed and hard working but when not working most of them are very calm, stay out of the way and are generally just good dogs. Some are tied up / sedentary for days before it's their turn to work and they seem to have no obvious undesirable or behavioral problems. Most farmers also said that the really hyper dogs don't actually make good working dogs as they waste energy and can't be in the right spot at the right time. So I wouldn't see getting a working bred kelpie for a competition dog as a problem so long as you give it a job to do and get a well bred one from good lines. To say all the working instinct has been bred out of show kelpies is pretty dramatic.

Actually she said: Which I think is very misleading. I've know DA Golden Retrievers, who if escaped from their yard would attack other dogs and probably cause injury. There is no "perfect" breed and any medium to large DA dog is likely to cause harm if allowed to wander unattended. This statement is just plain wrong. ALL dogs are capable of the same level of aggression. However, some breeds are not as able to inflict the same level of damage, and some breeds may be less prone to showing high levels of aggression. This in no way excuses the behaviour of the two attacking dogs, however, I feel discussions of specific breeds are generally not useful and can often lead to misleading statements or "urban myths" being perpetuated.

Any news on Morgan yet? Hope all went well

Wishing Morgan the best of luck for Monday! She looks like a gorgeous girl.

I wasn't talking about any dog specifically, I'm just saying, what is the criteria for the perfect recall? IMO you can have perfect recall. My criteria with recall is what I said before (coming the first time every time within two seconds of me giving the command) so that's what we train for. You can, but you'd have to agree that it is hard work! Do you think a dog can still have perfect recall when it feels/ reacts fearfully? Obviously i would be ideal to recall it before the fear kicked in, but do you think that a well trained dog will recall even if it is very scared?

Having a GDV prone breed, I feed 2 smaller meals instead of one large one. Although sometimes I only feed one meal a day (if she has had other treats) or no meals at all (if I have used her food for training etc)

The OP never said it was aggression Over exuberance to the point of scaring a puppy is not acceptable, nor is aggression.

Don't all dogs do zoomies? Well at least all puppies/younger dogs?

I feel the problem is not enough responsible owners for all the animals out there I do not feel subsidizing irresponsible owners is fair on the rest of society. Whilst there are many benefits of owning a pet, it is a CHOICE. I have heard stories of people dumping pets in pounds and then going on holidays and coming back for a cuter puppy or kitten on their return. So I don't see how subsidised desexing and no surrender fees will help the majority of people. I would think most BYB dogs are not bred because owners can't afford desexing. There are plenty of responsible owners who have entire dogs (and cats) and manage to not let them breed, so I don't really think desexing in itself is going to be the answer. There are too many people who want a cute litter of pups or kittens for the "kids to experience" or to make a quick buck. I think education and possibly some kind of regulation is key to addressing this.

But who should subsidise desexing? Many vets already make a loss on spey and castrates. $200 is not really much for major abdominal surgery and I've seen castrates for as low as $50 Should the government pay? Should taxpayers subsidise a persons decision to have a pet? Ideally only people who could afford a pet and the associated costs would get one, I think this is part of the problem- people think they have a "right" to get a pet whether they are in a position to look after it or not.

All you can do is try- good on you for at least doing that Sadly, some people will get a puppy no matter what you say and no matter how unsuitable their situation, and sadly, in this country it is extremely easy to purchase a puppy, especially if you're willing to get it from less than reputable sources. I don't know what else to say but to try your best to help her to see the best thing to do in her situation, without being too negative and doom and gloom (as it rarely works until people experience the problems for themselves first hand).

Without type a dog is merely a dog. Type is what best describes a breed. Could you elaborate on this? I don't quite understand the meaning of "type" For example I think most people can see the difference between show and working line breeds eg. GSDs, Labs, Setters etc but both "types" can easily be identified as the correct breed. But why is only one "type" rewarded in the show ring? As another example, my pet labrador is hardly a potential show winner, yet most people correctly identify her as a labrador. Are you saying she is "merely a dog" and not a "labrador retriever" because she lacks (show-winning) type?

It is possible for chooks and dogs to live relatively happily together. What is unrealistic is to give the dog free rein to run havoc amongst the chooks and expect all to be well (not saying this is what happened here) which is what plenty of people do. Like any socialisation, it has to be done gradually under controlled circumstances (eg chickens in cages and dog on lead), at least initially. I think that the fact the dog has already killed one/some? chickens means that it will be harder to train the dog to ignore the chickens, because it has already had a very rewarding experience killing them. Not saying it is impossible though- I suggest the OP takes up Lilli's offer of discussing the exact situation.

Wow he is lovely gsdog2! Sounds like you've done a great job with him

Petplan can pay directly to the vet. It is up to the vet whether they will accept this (as petplan can take a few weeks to pay up) or whether they will require upfront payment.

I used to feed canidae grain free salmon as well. Had to stop due to difficulty in getting it. My allergy lab did very well on it. She is quite active and will do at least 3 hrs of exercise a day. I fed her 2 cups, 2 times a day, plus a raw meaty bone. I now feed royal canin sensitivity control but sadly that is going out of stock I thought the canidae was a good food, however I don't think there was a noticeable improvement on it (compared to RC sensitivity), I didn't notice any change in energy or poo (although my dog has a an iron stomach, so changing brands doesn't really bother her tummy much). If my my vet stocked it- I would probably buy it over Hills or Eukanuba.

No I don't wash my dog after a swim (unless shes been in really foul water). She gets a good rub down with a towel, but thats it.

This article was sent to myself and other students by another vet. I admit I was shocked that many of the Uga bulldogs died so early. I don't know if it is just that particular line of bulldogs (and if it is, one must wonder why they keep using them?), I haven't heard such shocking life expectancies in australian Bulldogs. Are British Bulldogs as popular in Australia as they are in the US and Britain?

Link (too long to post the whole article): Can the bulldog be saved?