moosmum

Hope you are still with us Chris. Re desexing, I wouldn't want to desex a baby either,but I don't think desexing is cruel. If you don't want to desex when shes older,it will be even more important that you have a way to keep her securely separated when you don't want them together. She could possibly come into season as early as 6 months. Way too young for a litter and why the vets try to get you booked in by then. The signs are easily missed if you are not very used to what they are. The signs aren't the same in all dogs and some barely give it away even when you do know what to watch for.Others can go nuts and will do anything to get to a male. Drives you and your neighbours nuts too! Its your choice,but desexing makes managing them SO much easier. If you want to breed,do a whole lot more research 1st.Its best if you can talk to the people who bred your dogs and see their parents. Make sure they are both healthy and have no health issues,or temperament problems that may pass down into what you breed.If theres some thing not perfect or you don't like,theres just as much chance that will carry as not.More chance if any relations have the same fault. Its what makes pedigree papers so useful because you can trace the blood lines to look for these things,and give you the chance to choose dogs for breeding that will give the best results. People who buy the pups,you can tell them what they should expect. Helps to find the most suitable homes where the pups can get what they need. Owners have a chance to make sure they can provide that. To me, your problems finding a suitable home for your girl are a very good reason NOT to breed. Imagine trying to find good homes for 8 or 9 pups! My sons girl had a litter of 18. A home is not the same as a good home,just take a look at the urgent rescue pages on this forum to see what I mean.It would break the heart of any breeder to have a pup you bred in that situation. As for managing if you keep both,thats hard. I can't give any advise except to be prepared for mayhem. I've kept 2 pups at once and would only do it again if I had to. You won't get the best from either of of your pups they can give. You can make it work, but its such hard work! Will the end result be worth it?

Chris001 not a breeder. If they stick around,they might learn breeding is not something they want to do. Or if they do,thats its worth doing right.

:laugh:

You have someone asking questions and taking the answers on board, and you want to tell them they don't know anything so don't bother ?

YES!! Thanks for the tip to try here DiscoDobe, one of these scooters is just what I need. ( and the harness. ) Now to check out ebay. Where is the best place is Auss to get a harness please peeps? I won't have to be out on the road. edited 'cos sticky keys

I want to be there to see the shop assistant's face when you do. :laugh: :laugh: Returned it yesterday- The assistant refused to show any expression. It was worth a few laughs at home.I posed with my sons hoodie and copped jokes like " nice neighborhood... till the granny gang moved in. We were going to be " Moo and the Mambo Mamma" :cool: Thanks DiscoDobe, I shoulda thought of that.

I have... a brand new skate board sitting in the corner with my horse riding helmet. I was going to use it on our quiet rural road with the Mucus, so I could keep up with her energy for for the best walks ever! I had visions of conquering some thing new,how much farther we could go and once learned,how much easier it would all be. I walked out to the car and said to O.H, Look what I bought! and he went I went I put up a good battle,but he and the kids ganged up on me. I didn't stop to think it was illegal,or needed a smoother surface (does it realy? ) Looks like I have to take it back and say my kids won't let me have it.

My experience has made me look for what went wrong. Why have pedigree dogs failed me,and why are they failing others that they need a marketing strategy? What perceptions do you need to change? Pedigree breeding should be a good and effective system with clear and obvious benefits,so why isn't it working ? Humans and dogs have been evolving side by side for thousands of years. Thats under threat. WHY? IMHO its because we have become polarised into 2 camps. Those who believe records and protocols are the way forward,and those who believe we need means for a more spontaneous evolution. So one group decends into chaos while the other is being strangulated.Two extremes with no middle. Why is there no balance in this system? Because it is a system. A remarkablely ineffective one. You can argue back yard breeders,commercial farms and A.R all you want,but I see them as a symptom. Looking for some one to blame doesn't tackle the problems.Why is our present system giving rise to these issues? We keep pointing the finger at people to say they are wrong and digging a deeper hole.Whats wrong with the system? A.R and peta haven't prevented a whole host of new legislation now on the table that will directly benefit commercial producers. Legislation that will make it harder for breeders of ANY other stripe. People want companion animals in their lives. A.R/Peta are too radical and "fringe" to affect that. People want a say in whats desirable today. We can't see into the future to know our needs tomorrow,so it would be nice to know we have enough flexability to meet those needs,what ever they are. Why is impossible to reconcile these things? I believe that unless we can reconcile the 2 halves of the system we have,commercial will be the only system we are allowed. An economicaly controlled compromise. A pedigree is not a history. A dog lives its history. Its written new each generation.A pedigree is a tool to find some of that history, most of it never recorded.A more intimate knowledge depending on experience and memory is still required.A pedigree alone doesn't ensure a future for a line or a species,only that it can be traced for as long as it lasts. So why is it the pedigree is given more value than the dog or the history it represents? Its written into the rules and constitution and is a core belief that divides us into 2 poles for no real purpose. Market better practices and the message will do a lot of good and help to change a lot of things for all dogs.It would be a worthy central message to define pedigree breeders but it won't. The N.K.Cs constitution and rules do that. We need to find and fix the problem. Treating the symptoms isn't working for anyone.

Sorry Anne, I'm trying to find a way to demonstrate that a flaw in the writing of the NKCs rules and constitution can set them up for failure by creating contradictions. Pedigree dogs need a public that finds value in them to continue, yet they don't allow a ready response to evolve for public needs.Not because they can't, but because of many breeders reluctance to accept the legitamacy of doing so. Its more urgent to appease their peers. The public don't want to buy into that. I'm sure the root cause supporting that culture is to be found in the NKCs rules and constitution and I don't think marketing alone will change THAT perception. Thats an inside job. I think the message has been corrupted some where along the line to take away a balance of needs. Breeders seem to have trouble accepting the public they depend on with out demanding what the public refuses to give up. I think I'll go away and try to find a better way to express this. :laugh:

I hate to repeat myself but that is marketing the purebred dog! The message is that there are good husbandry practices and a rich purposeful history. Marketing and promotion is messages. Messages are to alter perceptions. The messages are determined after research and information gathering. If that is what the message should be to increase the positive perception of purebred dogs then your work is half done. Marketing is messages. I disagree, I think that would be marketing a better attitude of understanding and responsibility to companion animals and breeding as a whole.But using the word pedigree to claim that attitude is a part of what makes pedigree a dirty word for so many.Its a false claim and experience will contradict it. Market the attitude with out trying to claim it exclusively and pedigree breeders come out looking far more approachable,open friendly and realistic. Accepting the message can apply to any breeder/owner,registered or not allows it to benefit all dogs. You don't need to promote "pedigree" dogs. The ideals can be promoted to lead people to a better understanding of responsible breeding. When the message is understood by breeders and buyers alike,then the benefits of a pedigree are self evident. Breeders themselves need to be more open,flexible,friendly and Visible,as per the OP.

I hate to repeat myself but that is marketing the purebred dog! The message is that there are good husbandry practices and a rich purposeful history. Marketing and promotion is messages. Messages are to alter perceptions. The messages are determined after research and information gathering. If that is what the message should be to increase the positive perception of purebred dogs then your work is half done. Marketing is messages. Indeed it is! So why is the word "pedigree" used to market those points ? As if a pedigree is evidence of them? A pedigree is the most valuable tool to achieving consistent quality, yes. But too many, breeders and buyers alike, Are led to see the pedigree as what confers quality.That proof of an unbroken,undiluted line is the goal and the legacy and the future.That can only lead to disillusion. To me,there is something terribly wrong when the man who gave me hope for my breeds future is labeled unethical and just plain wrong and irresponsible because he valued his dogs history over the records for it.History over inventory. Reliability over predictability. I believe the constitution shapes the culture,as legislation does.Restrictions placed concentrate and narrow the view point in unexpected ways. Stated goals,well worded,should always be used instead where possible. Goals should be the focus into the future.What a person WILL do.As with legislation,Once you start on what people can't do you have to be very very careful you aren't on a slippery slope to an enclosed space with no room to progress.

I agree that good marketing will bring more interest in pedigree dogs,and increase numbers of pedigree breeders as well,but what realy affects the success of any marketing strategy is people experience.The best marketing strategy is useless if experience won't back it up. Not all breeders are equal. In order to get THAT message across,it has to be accepted that this applies to all breeders,not just pedigree breeders. I grew up in a home that values quality,anything worth doing is worth doing right etc.So pedigree dogs were the only real choice IF you have specific criteria to be met. We thought about breeding briefly,but decided we were happiest to just keep one to 3 dogs simply for our own needs and enjoyment. We left the breeding and showing to the experts. That worked well for many years. We bought and were given good dogs by breeders who knew our dogs and what we gave to them/made of them. What changed was a decline in the quality of the dogs.It came to head when we had a a particularly problematic dog whos issues I won't go into here. More research was needed. You know what? I was horrified. The breed club I called several times told me 1st the qualities I wanted wouldn't be found. These qualties were were breed traits. I called community and services that had been known to use this breed and had given rave reviews only to find they would not touch them with a 10 foot pole any more due to health issues 1st,behavioural second. I still didn't give up....This was a breed that had served me well until recently. There HAD to be breeders still breeding for what made the breed.Back to the breed club,new spokes person.I had been offered a BYB,pure bred,3rd generation bred specificaly for the job, so asked what benefits a pedigree would offer that this dog could not. The answer I got was a tirade detailing how much this fellow had spent on vet fees.I got the byb and she was every thing I wanted,living long past the average life span with no veterinary intervention ever needed until old age and arthritis. I'm happy to go on a list to wait for a good dog. I'm happy to research. Within reason.I have a purpose for my dog and if it takes me 2 years find a breeder who can match my needs before I apply to get on that list,then hope for the best I will need to match my needs else where. Marketing has to backed up with results, good experience and professionalism. I haven't given up on my breed,I know lots is being done to bring them back. I worship those who work to that end But research alone is no help to me yet. It could take me years to find a breeder who values or even recognizes the same temperament type as I do,has dogs proven in living conditions to have those qualities. The health issues are harder,with many very common issues unable to be tested for yet. I've come to think there is a flaw in the basic K.C rulings that influences the culture into ever decreasing parameters. Take GSDs. Working lines/show lines/white/long coat short coat etc. Each time the breed is further separated,the gene pools decrease. I don't think its about pedigree dogs Vs mongrels.Its about modern society and expectations, History and purpose of breed.Planning and fore thought. I think its a mistake to promote pedigree 1st,for its own sake.Instead promote good husbandry practices,history and purpose that can have meaning to the uninitiated.Its not the pedigree that makes a registered dog better a better choice,its the history it reveals to be built on or rejected.planning and forethought.Pedigree will never be seen as the single thing that defines a good dog in the eyes of average Joe. IMHO a change in attitude there would increase interest in pedigree dogs as a logical choice, but also improve the quality of breeders. I think its not pedigrees that make a good dog so its not pedigrees that should be pushed. Its practices.Planning,history, purpose and quality.Those are things that every one who owns a pet should be concerned with

:D

Yes!!

And that's where it's possible to be proactive. Get the information to the consumers.... about companion dogs & how they're best bred and raised to be so. Information that's based on evidence. CHOICE (the Australian Consumers' Association) took a first step back in 2006 with their advice on how to buy a dog. Gently & rationally, they point people towards registered breeders... & to responsible rescue. Away from a 'farming' style of producing puppies. With a little tweaking to add more explicit evidence .... like socialisation of both puppies & mother dogs, & what constitutes a home-style setting .... this kind of information should be got out to the public. http://www.choice.com.au/reviews-and-tests/household/backyard/pets/buying-a-dog.aspx Better information will allow pet owners vote with their feet when getting a puppy/dog. And also gather support for criticism of any proposed laws that could reduce the best sources for getting sound companion dogs. This. There is a huge un tapped human resource thats being ignored. We are ALL focused on cases that are used to illustrate a need for regulation. Its not just peta using these tactics. Many of us here use the same to denigrate non ANKC breeders.They in turn use the same against pedigree breeders.Shocking things happen and they will always happen,but we aren't hearing about how people are spending more than ever on their pets care and veterinary treatment or any other positive change in pet ownership.There are plenty. People are much more aware of animal welfare issues and society is changing . While every one is busy pointing the finger at where legislation is needed, none are promoting practices that are shown to work for both welfare and pet buyers.Regardless of whether they are ANKC or not.

That would be hard to put behind you.

I looked at it like this- If talking about re-homing as an option doesn't make people appreciate what the dog has to offer, its likely the sensible thing. Considered seriously, it can give a new appreciation of the dog and how you could improve things. Give incentive to work on it instead. The O.P is aware of their choices. They listed them. You can say try to bond,spend more time with them etc. Or re-train,but they have to see that its worth it 1st. You can't promise it is. A dog perfectly matched to its home can give dog and humans so much much joy in each other. Doesn't always happen. If its not in the best matched home,but you find it,You have at least 2 very happy,contented beings and thats got to be a good thing? Dol promotes research and thought before getting a dog, a lifetime commitment, Matching puppies to homes,training and behaviourists and sharing time with your dogs and promotes those every day. But mistakes are made. Though working on problems is preferable,some times people just don't have the resources to do that time wise, financialy emotionaly mentaly or other reasons.

Sorry for your loss,would be horrific to deal with and hard to to take that risk again as things stand.

Me too. :)

We have 2 destructo dogs where bedding is concerned. Best bed I've found for my biggest is a single foam mattress from salvos,ex hospital with a tight fitting thick vinyl cover.Seems indestructable and great for such a heavy boy on hard floors.Old car bench seats last well too.

Its not an unpopular opinion. I think most of us feel that way,but with the best of intentions mistakes can still be made. I just don't think its helpful for the dogs if their owners are made to feel they are "stuck" with the situation. Far more likely a dog will be quietly disposed, dumped or homed to the 1st person who who comes along if re-homing can't even be discussed without judgement. ( not saying in this case )

Thanks for that. Yep,depressing and worse than I thought. A good reason to use older studs,rather than make laws banning that! Knowing my 2 both have parents still going strong entering their teens is some comfort.

There can be a lot of reasons for a miss match. One not meeting the needs of the other. Most things can be worked on,but sometimes its more realistic to call it a miss match for both. The effort may not be sustainable.It may be causing problems for others. Or the dog simply be happier else where.

I use "End". Sounds a lot like "And",heard all the time. I think because the word is used by itself and with more formality they get it quickly.The context is clearer?

:)