moosmum

I don't believe its the majority who are being irresponsible. The irresponsible are the ones who draw notice and are very often repeat offenders.Some one who doesn't give a rats can cause a lot of damage all by themselves. On the whole,I think theres been a lot of improvement and could be a lot more if there was a bit of common community recognised in being a dog owner,full stop. There will always be cross breds,and a registration system will be needed to be a breeder. Seems a shame to me that there will be so many,all at each others throats over what it all means,when a common registry allowing for real competion, growth with the times,and common membership could be a uniting force with real teeth.

I know my research science.....which is why I point out that statistically one group of breeders (registered) stood out (in a scientific study) in how they tend to socialise their dogs and puppies well. Important, because as the same study points out, lack of early socialisation has a link with later aggression. 'Statistically' means there's a greater chance of a certain group of breeders (registered) socialising their animals well. It predicts nothing about individual breeders, tho'. So it does not mean that every breeder in that group socialises their dogs/puppies well. There will be those who do not. Also, statistically, breeders in another group (unregistered) were found, in the same study, to be less likely to socialise their dogs/puppies well. Once again, this predicts nothing about individual breeders in that group. So it does not mean that every breeder in this unregistered group does not socialise their dogs/puppies well. There will be those who do. What is highlighted is the critical importance of socialisation....whoever does it. And the information that registered breeders are more likely.....but not invariably so....to do it well. We have good examples from individuals who do it well. Clearest descriptions I've heard, are from Jed here on DOL & the member of the Rottweiler Club of Victoria on Radio National. As this is a purebred forum that supports purebred dogs, such examples make good models. Your comment suggesting it's being said that one group...meaning all members of that group... 'stand out as a better example' is not true. That would show lack of knowledge of statistics. Stats show trends within groups...and examples are shown by individuals (whoever they are). Exactly. So it seems Membership statisticaly improves out comes. How do we broaden membership to include all interests? The example of hybrid vigour was used to show how different sides present only 1 half of the truth to push their arguments,while both could bennefit from a broader knowledge. Definitely stop being defensive, and strutt your stuff! But involve others where possible,not just the ones already there.You know they are dwindling.There are other contributions to made outside of pedigree dogs,and that needs to be aknowledged.It holds back on credibility. Allow others to strutt their stuff too. Im certainly not preventing you or anyone from any group from strutting their stuff in fact it appears to me that the cross breeder mob have had a pretty fair shot at it and the reality is probably the only people who beat you up a bit are a dwindling number of purebred breeders.In the main that is happening because they have had to defend what they do because the method of promoting designer dogs has incorporated an attack on purebreds and their breeders. There may be contributions made outside of pedigreed dogs but my focus is only on pedigreed dogs and whilst Im eager to include dog owners regardless of what breed they own and bring in new pedigreed dog breeders,and Im happy for you to do your thing as long as you treat your dogs well - its a bit silly to suggest we would involve you if what you do is based on a different philosophy. Asking us to involve you is like asking the NRL to involve the AFL. Not a different philosphy at all,just different conclusions as how best to acheive them.My breed was bred for a task they can no longer be relied on to perform.If I could get the original,working pedigree dogs reliably,as I could 30 years ago? I would be rapt! One of the problems is that they have been "strutting their stuff" only with in their own circles and breeds for so long no one remembers what the breed was once capable of.A task in demand for all times,and they excelled. Now,they are measured only against their own,bred to a standard that allows no adaptation for the times and no focus on a purpose thats still relevant. To me,thats not development,thats stagnation of a once great gene pool.Theres no competition to remind us of whats realy relevent to that breeds success. My dogs live their purpose 24/7. I need a model that works. Most other breeds are in far better shape,I agree.There are too many that aren't tho'.No ones fault.Just a system thats not moved with changed circumstances and times. The generations of a dogs life are just long enough to forget what we had,but too quick to bring it back or find it again once lost. Moderm breeding practices as they stand,IMO,seem more intent on Illustrating a physical ideal,not demonstrating it. I am NOT against your philosphies,I applaud them.I just want them to succeed better and not lead to more dead ends. I also think that all parties need to be more open minded to each other and that tradition is not always worth preserving. This is too far off topic.I just wanted to show its doesn't have to be "us Vs them all the time.The sooner we can stop that,the better progress can made.

I don't know about others, but my local council does offer a rebate of sorts. I fail to see the difference between a discounted rego fee and a rebate for desexed animals. This also doesn't take into account the owners of large breed dogs in which a much later desexing is advised due to their extended growth period over say a chihuahua or small terrier. Or encourage pups to be chipped with breeders details.

I know my research science.....which is why I point out that statistically one group of breeders (registered) stood out (in a scientific study) in how they tend to socialise their dogs and puppies well. Important, because as the same study points out, lack of early socialisation has a link with later aggression. 'Statistically' means there's a greater chance of a certain group of breeders (registered) socialising their animals well. It predicts nothing about individual breeders, tho'. So it does not mean that every breeder in that group socialises their dogs/puppies well. There will be those who do not. Also, statistically, breeders in another group (unregistered) were found, in the same study, to be less likely to socialise their dogs/puppies well. Once again, this predicts nothing about individual breeders in that group. So it does not mean that every breeder in this unregistered group does not socialise their dogs/puppies well. There will be those who do. What is highlighted is the critical importance of socialisation....whoever does it. And the information that registered breeders are more likely.....but not invariably so....to do it well. We have good examples from individuals who do it well. Clearest descriptions I've heard, are from Jed here on DOL & the member of the Rottweiler Club of Victoria on Radio National. As this is a purebred forum that supports purebred dogs, such examples make good models. Your comment suggesting it's being said that one group...meaning all members of that group... 'stand out as a better example' is not true. That would show lack of knowledge of statistics. Stats show trends within groups...and examples are shown by individuals (whoever they are). Exactly. So it seems Membership statisticaly improves out comes. How do we broaden membership to include all interests? The example of hybrid vigour was used to show how different sides present only 1 half of the truth to push their arguments,while both could bennefit from a broader knowledge. Definitely stop being defensive, and strutt your stuff! But involve others where possible,not just the ones already there.You know they are dwindling.There are other contributions to made outside of pedigree dogs,and that needs to be aknowledged.It holds back on credibility. Allow others to strutt their stuff too.

Steve,I understand that,and i am working on my own submission.Those who are supposedly speaking for "my group" are mostly pushing their own agendas ,often comercial ventures and D.Ds. The real stake holders are those that buy these dogs,whatever their source and most of them are blissfully unaware of all thats going on behind the scenes. They are the ones who happily sign cleverly worded petitions by Peta and welfare groups with out any understanding of what it all means to their choices and options. There are few avenues of engaging these people and opening their eyes to the real,broad picture.Their education in these matters is very limitted,though they often sign with the best of intentions. I am saying there needs to be ways these people can experience a broader view of pet ownership and where their dogs come from.The value of pedigree dogs etc. BTW a point worth mention is the "hybrid vigour" slogan trotted out by D.D breeders and refuted here lies some where between.Hybrid vigour is proven,but true hybrids are inter species,not with in species and are infertile mostly.Any hybrid vigour within species is nominal,but there only due to closed lines of pedigree animals and valid only in the 1st cross. At least thats been my understanding.A bit more discourse and less animosity between ALL groups can only benefit,surely.

This, this and this again. Why is it in this society the person who is the total tool and the person actually casuing the problem doesn't get their backside hauled over the coals?????? The person who is dumping the dog is the problem. I have entire dogs, they don't roam or fight or pump out puppies. I even have entire dogs of the opposite sex and still can keep them from pumping out puppies - funny that is is called being in control of your dogs and their behaviour. Do something about the people who dump their dogs/puppies and the problem will be fixed. Euthanasia would be the prefered option but for some reason the Human rights mob don't seem to like that. It also amazes me how the leaders and spoke's people for apparent animals rights groups and the otehr loonies out there want to breed out completely the animals they supposedly care about. Me thinks they are in the wrong job! Yep,Infuriating isn't it? I know of one young woman with 2 kids who is responsible for at least 10 of the "dumps" at our local pound in the last 4 years.She gets a cute little pupy for the kids to "play" with (the oldest 3 yo) and dumps it when the poor little mites are ruined for any normal life after being kicked and squashed and terrorised.She dumped a litter with their mum when she had her 1st child. If point of sale miocrochipping and rego. was enforced,there would be tool for authorities to see whats happening and act. As it is,any complaint investigated can only "get" her on having un chipped dog and no rego. Euthanasia sounds good to me too.

Met one of those yet? Don't hold your breath. *Yep,I'm one. And as for the good old fashioned pet show? Why on earth would the ANKC want to organise one. They already allow neuters to compete and frankly my guess is they've got enough battles on their hands protecting the interests of PAYING members - and they include owners of crossbred Associate dogs. *so start an appendix registry,lots of fees,lots of people looking into pure breds and what they mean,lots of chance to educate people to better ways,incentive for some of the more unethical breeders to lift their game and LOTS more learning to look at the big picture. Little old ladies and 15 year old boys can be seen in the ring at ANKC dog shows on any weekend you choose. *Not the ones you need to reach.Some one has to offer an olive branch,and I don't see any one else in a position to do so. Yep,I'm one.Trouble is,no one can say that here and no one else who can speak for you can either.

There is nothing inherently wrong about deliberatlely breeding cross breds.Its when its not a well informed decision,with the breeder willing to take responsibility for the results,and for the quality of life they will live that causes problems in any part of the dog world.

I agree however, we worked pretty hard to get our members equal benefits as the ANKC - we didn't set the system up and until recently there was only one group who could get any exemptions if they were ever on the table. It only means that the group agrees to police their members which theoretically lets the people who are supposed to be policing it need to take a lesser look at them. In an ideal world it wouldn't be so bloody over regulated and there would be no need to beg for exemptions. They justify it by saying its less administration for members of one of the groups which are exempt from the fees. It doesn't mean they are exempt from having to follow the same laws as everyone else - just means they get a reduction in council fees. There is no statement that one group is better just that one group is promising to police their members and so get a reduction in fees. And theres no blame in that.I'd have done the same in your shoes. I guess what gets to me most is that there is no other group in a better position to improve the lot of ALL dogs and breeders/interests.For the most part they choose to distance themselves.Dog shows are not a welcome place for any who want to say anthing positive about their own dog,unless its also a pedigree,same as DOL. Yet the majority of dog owners have cross breds,be they working cross,D.D, back yard accidents,Aunty Socials cute terrier cross.If they could just put some the "dogma" aside long enough to connect with these people as dog lovers,so much more could be acheived.Instead the focus is always on what they don't know,the irresponsibility and lack of planning etc..Very patronising for people who are quite happy with what the've got. Some good ald fashioned community pet shows,where any old mutt can have a category against the world champion Guatamalan dog of splendour.Allow little old pensioners and 15 year old boys with their dogs to rub shoulders with Brazillian Lizard Hounds.That might start the ball rolling.

Buts its very counter productive to keep saying"one group of breeders' stands out as a better example in all these arguments. Why do they stand out? Because they have a community of people they work, with,consult with,compete against,peer pressure and readily available information.Thats what enables them to stand out,and what stands in the way of many other dog interest groups. With every new bit of legislation,dogs are further removed as a "community" interest and pushed further out of the community.Becoming unknown and unpredictable to any one who hasn't owned one....Leading to more intolerance and mismanagement.And finger pointing.And legislation ultimately. We need unity in the dog world. Any welfare aimed at preserving dogs a place in society needs to engage that society,not issolate it. Learn to celebrate dogs as a community and encourage family oriented events where ALL dogs are welcome and theres an incentive to learn from each other. When breeders say "But we are better and should be exempt" they issolate themselves and can teach no one.On top of that,they create resentment. They miss out on other points of view that are no less valid and help to keep the the dog community divided and themselves on their own,with ever dwindling numbers. All sectors are under attack and registered breeders in general are just as happy to see that as long as they get exemptions,because they have set themselves apart as better.Should dog owner ship,and breeding become near impossible for Joe public,pedigree breeders will be more issolated than they ever dreamed. Every sector can has lots of room for improvement,including pedigree breeders,and every sector can learn from the other,but theres no community or common ground in dog ownership for that to happen. Untill there is,no ones going to HAVE the broader view needed for change.

I am working on a submission now.

The O.P was not taken as an indictment of working dog breeders,or others,but some of the responses to the O.P are taking that attitude.You asked for thoughts,I've stated mine. The attitude shown by some posters serves the prejudice. P.S,good post Mita.

This. Stereo typing and generalisation works both ways. I produce working dogs.Cross bred and unregistered.Many are excelling in their field,which is one neglected by many breeders and I know of no other specialising for their qualities. I breed for a demand,not often.I have a waiting list for pups,many repeat buyers and often those willing to take older dogs.I do things to ensure the best of homes that many registered breeders only pay lip service to.I have great admiration for pedigree breeders who work towards producing the best dogs possible,but they aren't able to produce dogs that will do the job my own can,with the degree of reliability my own can.If they did,I would not be doing this. I hardly think all pedigree breeders are snobs.I would have prefered to be among their ranks,or just able to reliably buy from them.Instead,there is a lot of vilification and broad generalised false hoods tolerated or encouraged on DOL that reinforces the idea of pedigree breeders being snobs.Usually from just a few but when no defence is tolerated or even permitted,your going to get fall out.

The Australian Working Dog action Plan is a govt.initiative tasked with advising on up to date welfare stragies. One of their proposals is a research body able to disseminate info.on latest research to relevent stakeholders. I am drafting a letter to the principle researcher asking that an independent(ie: not affiliated with local/govt.R.S.P.C.A or any other stakeholder)"dogs advocate" be included in any such research body. My idea would be that this advocate could intervene where legislation or local by laws directly affect welfare out comes for our dogs. BSL is one example,But I know there are many other examples where R.S.P.C.A or local councill rulings have have been grossly unjust and there is often no avenue of appeal or reason. I am putting this out there in the hopes that others may agree with the need for a "dogs Advocate" with such powers.If so,please write to chief researcher at [email protected]. letting them know you support this idea and how it would aid the proposed research body. The dog world is fractured with no one interest group being heard sensibly and I believe an advocate would unifie interests,point out what questions NEED asking,allow for problems to be solved at a more grass roots level,(Ie education!)and that any research body is incomplete with out a true working knowledge of the various interest groups that an advocacy would provide.

Can't think of a better way to bring about...a world full of idiots. Assume we are and legislate everything, so nothing can ever go wrong,and no one ever needs to learn anything but the rules.

She had a wonderful owner who is devastated,was so proud of her girl.well loved and yes,shes getting credit for saving the young girl. I'm proud of her.But so sad.

Just a warning that though we are into autumn,the snakes are still active.Please be alert. I have just heard of the death of one of my pups at only 5 months old.She was visiting a farm for socialisation with the animals when her owner said "she went nuts,knocking down an 11 year old girl.We didn't know what was happening till we saw she was killing a snake. I got it away from her and checked her out to find she had been bitten twice. I got her into the car and phoned the vets while I drove. She started fitting and passed away just as we finaly arrived at the vets." RIP Ziva I hate it when that happens.

Any chance of a bit of dialog on this subject? I believe any welfare solutions involving more regulation also requires an ombudman type of representaion,able to intervene on behalf of owners/dogs where breaches of welfare or council laws may be in the best interests of the dog.An avenue of appeal. A body able to note unforseen impacts,to recomend changes.Able to make recomendations for council policies that encourage responsible dog ownership and social enjoyment with out undue hardship. The dog world is horribly fractured.The voices heard loudest aren't representative of all stake holders.

In the meantime,the below thread "excersizing reactive dogs" might be useful. :)

At 55 kilos and 80 cms,Piddles. We have had Alias,a fox terrier.

I see a counter petition as essential.If no one speaks out these things are only going to gain momentum and there needs to be other sides to these debates put out there. Should state clearly why its such such a bad idea,but also put forward alternative solutions,such as better policing of policies already in place and educating the BUYERS of their responsibilities,law,and obligations. Encourage better research into where their puppy comes from, what responsible ownership means etc. Why wait for a body such as dogs N.S.W to step in,if they will. There are many interests with a stake here who would welcome a chance to dissagree,and no means to do so ATM.

Trouble is,we all are the same.Ethics aren't excluse to ANKC. As long as ANKC breeders can't see that,a broader view of ethics acceptable to all interests can't be reached. Every ones too busy trying to point the finger elsewhere and theres no Body to represent all interests equally. Whether breeders like it or not,there is a whole industry associated with dogs in the community and we are part of it. Edited to add, and affected by all legislation we ask for, or don't study very carefully and and comment on.

Thanks again for the help. Shes going. They have year to prepare and have looked into everything. They are used to traveling all over europe with dogs,and aren't put off by the protocols and they are familiar with them. Any problems getting her into the country when the time comes and she comes back to me.They don't expect to return,its a well planned retirement,and sounds like a great match. :)

Thanks Wayrod for that link, and Pretty Miss Emma. I have plenty to think about,and make sure the couple have taken into consideration. If they can satisfy me that they are well prepared for all this,I'll see. And if any problems she comes back to me. Socialisation will naturaly end up more neutralisation with this pup anyway,so mixing with dogs other than her owners 2nd small dog won't be an issue. I've only agreed to talk more if they can set my mind at rest with this information. I doubt very much they will have any behavioural problems. :)

Dogs wander around the place, most in poor condition. Whether the dog gets socialised would depend on whether the people have friends with dogs they could socialise with. You wouldn't want your dog socialising with the village dogs, you would really want your dog to ignore them. While they could walk a dog on the street there on a lead, unless they owned property it wouldn't get the same opportunity for off-lead exercise. Thanks Greytmate, The people sound lovely and reasonably financial,but slightly complicated by being an older couple. Might give it a miss.This dog could also be a target by the sound of things. I'd rather be safe than sorry! I doubt whether the dog would need to go into quarantine on arrival as most countries accept animals from Australia without quarantine. Bringing them back here is different. Vanuatu is a very divided society, not everyone there values dogs highly or keeps them contained. There is very little in the way of public infrastructure, and so the quality of the dog's life would depend a lot on the financial situation and attitude of the owner. If there were behaviour or complicated vet problems with the dog, I'm not sure what help they could get.