moosmum

Orwelian and draconian. A criminal offence to breed a dog or sell it without being speyed.(with out relevent permmitts all 'round) So much for breeding as hobby.So much for a pensioners interest in retirement.So much for health testing at appropriate age for breeding or the ability to allow a dog to grow out before decisions are made as to its future. And all totaly un-needed or useless if microchipping and current cruelty laws were properly utilised.

Excellent post shortstep! Legislation such as this has far reaching consequences that are rarely clear at the time...very few people seem to have tha ability to look at a problem from all angles and from the view point of various groups,of which there are so many.Fewer have the ability to see consequences of legislation long down the track with various scenarios. These laws WILL severely restrict law abiding and responsible people and no one else.If these laws were brought in Australia wide,they could see the end of dog onership eventualy,with gene pools so severely compromised there is little use even trying. If all dogs sold were microchipped before leaving the breeders premises,transfered into the new owners name BY the breeder with both details permanantly recorded on that dogs records,these details would aid greatly in discovering whats realy going on with whom.If anyone is serious about getting to the bottom of the problem,this would be an invaluable tool for research all on its own. I personaly know of 1 young mother who has had 10 dogs pass through her hands in the last 3 years.She currently has the 11th,a chihuahua pup "for her daughter 'cos its cute watching her carry it around" (and stomp on it,squeeze it,pick it up by the legs and swing its head into the ground.)All have been bought/given away un- chipped. When they are a hassle or no good anymore she hands them into the pound or gets a relative to take then to the vets as strays. The 1st I knew of was a kelpie pup kept till her daughter was born,then handed in the pound along with its 4 pups.There was a 5 week old ACD kept for 1 day till it bit the baby.A staffy X sharpei lasted a little longer. How are these laws going to stop this repeat offender who has been responsible for so many of the dogs ending up in pounds,all on her own!?! If current laws re- chipping were enforced and utilised,it would soon come to the attention of authorities what this stupid girl is doing and it could be acted on. Enforce the exsisting laws!!! AND educate the general public as to their responsibilities.You can not constantly blame breeders for poor choices,ethics and lack of responsibility on the part of every day dog owners who incidentaly,are the ones most likely to become those new and inexerienced breeders shortstep has mentioned.Educate them. PUBLIC awareness needs to be addressed.The average person who choses to "get a dog" has no idea and the problem will get worse while responsible breeders are forced ever more behind the scenes. Where a person advertises pups is not the problem either,its what happens after they have a response. What are the costs for lisences,inspections and policing to the law abiding person who breeds only 1 litter every few years before they can even contemplate it doing that? Why would the person breeding the occasional litter only because they believe in their dogs and what they have to offer and contribute, want to jump through all these hoops? Will the same sort of legislation be brought in to controll bad parents in the future? Legislation is not the answer. Can we please get back to idea of personal responsibility in society? Pups sold at markets etc,sure,a big problem.But why is a farmers B.C or kelpie any less likely to end up in the wrong home at a market?

Ms Le Couteur, I hope you are still following this thread,if so the thread"Saving Pets" further down in this news section,posted by Steve should be of geat interest. It seems that only 5% of dogs actualy ever need the services of a pound at any time in their lives. I would not be suprised if the owners of that 5% are not repeat offenders,based on experience. If exsisting laws were policed effectively with harsh penalties restricting ownership for repeat offenders,along with greater education of the general public on responsible dog ownership and choices I believe outcomes would be far more effective in the long term. Ausatralia is rapidly becoming one of the most "Dog Unfriendly "nations of the world,with pet ownership becoming increasingly difficult and costly. Fewer families are choosing to own dogs because of this. Further legislation will result in even fewer owning pets,and fewer exposed to them.This in turn leads to less knowledge and experience and more mistakes by new owners through ignorance...leading to more legislation. I will be submitting a detailed response to your draft.

Even the OP story doesn't live up to your high standards of "protection" DerRottweiler. So if you have a story go ahead and share, honour us dog owners who have dogs that merely growl or bark at strangers around their homes...even little 3 kg dogs that clearly trigger your contempt I'd love to hear about SuperDog... I'm just being realistic. I have tissues for all concerned parties that would like to have a sook. I'm sure the owners of the small dogs DO care very much,as the degree of courage and "stress" is much greater. Why the need to deprive people of their pride in their dog? Most of us are well aware that we can't rely on an untrained dog,so when they rise to the occasion,its cause for pride. No one has ever pushed it with my current dogs.Those people have had their own nerve and courage tested and so far they have been the 1st the back down.It would take a madman to try and we haven't encountered any of them yet.Realisticaly,we don't expect to.Within reason,I would still be pretty confident in my dog,but if the idea is not to deliberately put them in that situation,its a pointless speculation. I am happy to enjoy the stories.

Our dogs have been selected for a protective instinct,so many examples from here.They take the job seriously but calmly. The dog that made me appreciate this quality was my 1st dog as a child.A collie cross I had for 18 years. He was 5 years old when I went "camping "with 6 other kids.5 girls and a little brother of 7 in an old run down rural home stead. About 9 pm we heard some one on the roof.They were running back and forth and tho' logic told me it was likely a practical joker,at 14 years I wasn't game to take that for fact. We had 7 kids screaming their lungs out and racing back back and forth inside.I tried to go out to see who it was but the foot steps above my head made afraid to go through the door. I looked for the dog and saw him running about 70 metres away and thought he was pretty useless way out there(but he could see) There were 2 doors into the house and as I came back from one door the culprit climbed down and came in the other door.The kids were all laughing in releif that it was just a big sister from a neighbouring property. Next thing I know my dog streaked into the room from the oposite door and leaped for the girls throat!I literaly grabbed him in mid air by the collar.As soon as he realsed the kids were laughing and in no danger he calmed to be patted. Being in the bush is no safer realy,we have had fugitives from the police try to seek refuge here,so appreciate dogs who can be relied on when needed yet safe to be unconfined in a family and farm situation. One of our dogs was laying on the hall floor with visiting children sprawled with her when their father came in and started yelling at them.The dog stood up and placed herself between father and children and just gave a low growl.He stopped yelling and just said to me "I've been told" The dog was fine with him for the rest of the 3 days they were here. My kids,being in town have many more incidents of being protected from both people and dogs.No ones been bitten.The intense look and huge growls have always been enough with people any way.Dogs have been bitten and a pup from the same lines grabbed a mans ankles when he tried to throw his neice,the dogs owner, in the pool and she screamed.She held on till he let the girl go.He had only scratches to show for it but this pup suprised me as she is so non confrontational and makes it clear she just wants to be friends and play with every one,especialy children.

Hasn't been getting any macadamia nuts? maybe a long shot but worth asking. My old girl acted much the same after eating just a couple,but the effects only lasted about 12 hours. good luck,hope the mystery is solved soon.

Hi Horty! Hi Kuga! Happy Happy Birthday Kuges. Horts,hes such a beautiful boy.Always love that middle pic. Have a great day.

Poodle mum, No forum rules have been broken here.I don't promote designer or cross breds in,just an opinion that perhaps ethics can exsist out side of pedigree circles. I fully and whole heartedly support ethical,registered breeders who are genuinly dedicated to their breeds and their improvement. But cross breeds WILL always exsist and dog breeds have been created through the ages to fill perceived needs of society.I think to halt this entirely now,never having any more new breeds could actualy be dangerous for the future of dogs. There are breeds being lost as gene pooles shrink. It seems the queen is a very knowledgeable and respected dog person and I don't think all that should be null and void because she chose to cross. Alexhegyesi, I agree that the majority of back yard breeders deserve the bad rep.The term seems a very loose one though,and open to interpretation.Some are labeled simply because they breed small scale and don't show dogs themselves,though they may be very dedicated to their breed. Times are changing though and people are becomming better educated,hopfully the general public are also capable of learning or we are in trouble. I think there is too much division in the dog world and legislators are taking advantage of these divisions.To me,it important that we realise any one is capable of being ethical,its a matter of encouraging that rather than attacking every one because the end result is looking pretty ugly for pet ownership,period.

But what about overpopulation? There are enough dogs dying in shelters, why add more to an overflowing population? And AFAIK, very few, if any, byb'ers will bother to health test their stock, nor desex them or offer a desexing contract. At the very least, *ethical* registered breeders breed to improve, encourage responsible dog ownership, have desexing plans and often don't breed all that frequently. I'd rather them adding to the canine population than a byb'er. Just playing Devil's Advocate.. Sure,but you say"Ethical" registered breeders.Not all are,yet all are taught here that BYB is THE dirty word. I still don't believe "backyard breeder " always means unethical. I know of people breeding to most of the criteria you mention and whos dogs are in high demand,to pre approved homes only,with waiting lists,because they breed seldom and only from healthy stock,for specific purposes. And yes,At the very least,they also breed to improve,encourage responsible dog ownership,don't breed very often at all and monitor health as an ongoing responsibility. I also know of more than several pedigree/show breeders who miss out on most of the criteria you mention. Its not right to tar every one with the same brush. Again,surely its about welfare.

I personaly don't have a problem with backyard breeders anyway... As long as they are well looked after,raised and homed,don't have any in bred health problems and aren't promoted as a "designer breed" whats the big deal? If some one sees qualities in these dogs that they want,fine. To have only pure bred,pedigree dogs in the world would lead to bigger problems that exsist now. Not every one wants to show,breed and keep dogs only in the manner proscribed by those dedicated to keeping their specific chosen breeds. Surely it realy comes down to welfare,and I don't believe back yard breeder always means unethical.

Mitas advise sounds good. This is an idea thats worked for me. To get such a nervous dog to acept the lead you can try attaching a short length of baleing twine ( enough to dangle and grab hold of,visible to her and felt by her) to the collar by doubling it.Poke one end through the collar ring and bring the rest of the twine through the loop thats come though. Do not tie it,you want it to come off fast,with minimal fiddling. Leave the ends of the baling twine untied,so that IF the twine is tangled on any thing and she panics or struggles,it will fray and not get stuck. Do this only under supervision for short periods till she is used to the dangling twine,and will come readily and confidently to you to have it removed. Make sure there is no where inaccessible she can hide from you too.ie: under the house,and try to avoid any other forseeable problems- you want to avoid panic,and you must be able to remove the twine if its needed. Once she is at that stage,I would grab the twine and give gentle pull and release tugs while encouraging her to come forward.Every step forward gets a reward,pat/treat and keep the lessons very short. 1st time release her from the lead at the 1st sign of forward movement.Same thing for the next couple of lessons and only increase the time on lead very gradualy.Stop before she gets too nervous and always remove the twine when finished. For her to be comfortable on lead and at your mercy she has to have confidence you will look after her,and her other problems will have to be addressed at the same time for that to be effective. I hope you can find a good person to help.

Mine too! I'm always amazed at what my dog seems to have picked up without me making any effort to teach him, and the way he's able to grasp ' situations' - so I'm really looking forward to this program. That kind of of dog changes the way you see things pretty fast. Problem is your ruined for any thing else and no one gets quite where you are coming from till they also meet your dog.I'm sure people think I make up stories some time,so I'm realy looking forward to this show. What a fascinating area of research that would be.

Thanks Jacqui! My biggest interest,so an absolute must watch for me. I'm fully prepared to believe we've got a lot very wrong where dogs are concerned,and have a lot to answer for.

and I suppose the above is supposed to make me feel bettter That was 1 dog. I don't know how long you have had your dog,but this was a very intelligent working breed who was with me almost constantly and usualy went with us on hollidays.He had 6 years of that before we went away. I have had others who act like they didn't know we had been away. I wouldn't be offended with your dogs behaviour,I realy think dogs see things in very different ways depending on breed and personality and the type of intelligence. If I'm going to be unashamedly anthropmorphic,maybe your dog is just getting huffy that you dared leave." Oh,and who is this visitor then? I'll will just have to decide wether I like this person or not!" (walks off sniggering)

MM i have been wondering about this as well. just off the top of my head (and it might not be a good idea) but what if new people to the forum could only access a few areas and some more experienced dolers could be there to educate them. then they would learn without the trial by fire. i have to say though, some new people are their own worst enemy because they come in all guns blazing without any respect for the forum or the members here Thats not a bad idea. But rather than restrict access,maybe "recomend" they try the newbie area 1st if while they get a feel for the site,to avoid getting shot down.That way they wont feel they are on trial. Lots will still fall by the wayside,'cos Raz is right too,we get some who surely do ask for it!

I had to leave my 6 year old dog when I went overseas for a year asa teenager. When we got home and I asked to go get him,my father tried to talk me out of it,saying he wouln't remember me and the people who were looking after him were very attached and wanted to keep him. Finaly I convinced my dad I would leave the dog with his foster family if it looked like that would be best and off we went. When the car pulled up.he ran out in front of it barking and doinghis guard dog bit untill I opened the window and called his name. He sat down and th bark turned to a howl.As soon as the car door opened he was in and refused to get out to even say goodby. I got my dog back with no arguments from anyone.

Well that all gives a great answer to the designer dog breeders claim that their dogs are healthier...We can tell them there is a good chance dogs used to breed designer dogs were sold as pets because they were deemed unsuitable for breeding,and therefore the chances of hereditary defects could well be much higher than in dogs obtained from a registered breeder. I think promoting the reliability of type in pedigree dogs that have been bred some times for centuries with a specific purpose in mind,along with the goal for breeders of constant improvement are your 2 key points. How do we make places like DOL friendlier? If that could be done it would do pedigree breeders their bigest favour, it can be a great site for any one with an interest in dogs,but they are getting shot down before they can see the benefits.

Just a few things that have been mentioned i'd like to comment on. 1st, re; life time insurance. The way it was explained makes it a bit better than it 1st sounded,but at the same time it seems a bit of a cop out.On the part of BOTH buyer and seller.It would make the cost of a pure bred even more out of reach for many. Addressing known and controllable problems within a breed using all available tools should be priority,but on the other hand,buyers also need to take responsibility for making educated choices.Sh*t happens. 2nd,I don't think breeders are doing as good a job these days,but before I'm shot down for that,some of the reason is beyond their controll ATM. Not so many years ago,most of the breeds were still doing jobs they were bred for,and were far more plentiful because of it. A farmer had a rat problem,he might buy a pedigree Fox terrier .And the breeder who bred a good 'un would be recomended. Ditto with setters,pointers,utility dogs etc. Show wins weren't the only criteria used to judge a good dog and so the lines used were not as self limmiting. As the working abilities became less valued,some breeders altered the dogs temperaments etc to try to find a wider market,rather than screening buyers suitability for the dogs.The buyers are also not used to idea of dogs as a working animal,and have come to see them as pets only,expecting all to be suitable for their life styles.Some of the newer breeders naturaly come from those ranks and are more easily swayed by fads and see the pedigree itself almost as the end product.Its more than just a shame so many of the more experienced breeders are giving up. IMO getting the message across that different breeds were bred for specific purposes that they excelled at is central to promotion of pure breeds. 3rd,there was talk of the expense of importing dogs or semen to improve genric diversity.I haven't seen any one mention the idea of out crossing,yet have seen 1st hand some of the benefits with dogs being held up as good examples of a well bred dog for their "breed" with dogs N.S.W. Others doing various jobs that this breed was bred for,but experts will no longer take them on for training because they are no longer considered to have it in them. Yes,importing would always be important,but the best qualities do not have to be lost through out crossing and can be enhanced while reducing the impact of hereditary problems.Controll groups would show viability of this option with out harming any ones sensibilities. I will never embrace legislation to controll breeders.But I would certainly expect tightening up and change from within breed organisations.You need to be seen to have credibility to counter bad publicity.

The public doesn't get told. There's no coordinated public relations efforts on behalf of purebred dogs. It's skilled PR that's catapaulted rescue dogs into the public consciousness. You are correct. Problem is, when they ARE told, they don't believe it. Read what Shortstep wrote on SM in cavs. Excellent studies were presented to the forum, and the recommended protocol, which most breeders are using. Yet some on the forum were prepared to believe the opinion of a forum member in preference. Not a scientifically tested protocol, an OPINION by someone who is not a breeder, and which opinion will lead to the demise of these dogs - and is against the recommended protocol as well. Breeders who don't believe it will ever happen couldn't be bothered with promotion. Those (like me) who think it is all over red rover - and that is a hell of a lot of breeders - are winding down, as I said before. They will continue to wind down. And that will be an awful shame. I don't think its too late,but getting the right voices to be heard is a problem.I think Steves earlier post is great.A fighting spirit could still do so much.

Can I do that on here,or should I pm? Forget that,I'll P.M as I don't need any crap.

I agree that the pure bred dogs the public see are generaly seen in a "Show Dog" context and they need to be promoted more for what they were bred for,or as family dog/companions. The only people who can effectivley do this are their owners and breeders,but as to how,thats going to vary with breed and how much people are willing to get behind their breed. And yes,promote the progress that has been made. But,speaking as someone who gave up on owning my choosen breed as a pure bred,I see some changes are badly needed. I kept this breed for 20 years,not as a breeder but as a working dog.When I needed another and looked for it,I was told by the breed club I would not get one to fill my needs. My needs fit in with the breed standard for this dog. This is a breed I love.I did not give up lightly and searched for 6 years to find dogs that would fill my needs( I may possibly have had better luck had I known of DOL) All I found was that the breed was in even worse shape than I thought,with a shortened life span and miriad health problems. So I do think breeders need to take some responsibility too for public perception.Not all breeds,and not all breeds equaly,but they do need to be able to step back and look criticaly at their breed,and be honest with themselves about the best steps to take in REALY fixing the worst problems at least.Then lobby their registrars and members to act, before its too late. As a horse breeder,I can say that D.N.A on file is becoming a very common tool in confirming pedigree. That all stallions must pass a veterinary certificate of soundness before offspring can be registered,with different breeds often having additional checks added to the certificate. Out crossing is not viewed with the same horror in species bred for a specific purpose 1st,ie goats,horses,cattle,sheep and is often a very valuable tool in species who viability is treatened. This is done in a very controlled way,breeders still have the choice to use these animals or not in their own programs. I am NOT anti pedigree by any stretch.But I have come to see that the pedigree dog world operates by by rules that rarely apply to any other species bred by man and in many cases,its proving detrimental. Often breeders have very little real understanding of the origins and creation of their own breeds,or how much they have changed over time. A standard that askes for,say a sloped back may never have envisioned the degree that occurred over time.(this is just an example picked out of the air and should be considered made up) My intention is not to offend here,though no doubt many will be offended.

Sounds great,I will be very interested infollowing this line of research! Hope they study differences in breeds and working bred dogs/"pet" dogs as I feel there is often a great deal of difference.

Sorry no can do . In order to be treated the way we need it to be treated when it gets to the various sate parliaments it has to be done this way. Fair enough,i'll try to get a friend to print it for me and do what I can. Steve,thanks for all the work you are putting into these things.!

They've done it without BSL, restricting ownership, pet number limits, ownership licences or mandatory desexing. Because their community see them as a resource, not someone 'out to get them', there is an enormous amount of trust. You just can't get that if people are hiding their pit bulls or their 'extra' pet. They come down hard on people who do the wrong thing, but all their staff are trained in mediation so they use it as a chance to bring about change in owner behaviour, not just deem the owner 'irresponsible' and wait for something bad to happen. They also take proactive action; if you register four large breeds for example, they'll come around for a chat to make sure you know how to care for them appropriately. This video is long, but it outlines their whole program and approach: ** edited for spelling ** Sorry,I'm not computer savy enough to do it,but maybe this video link should be posted on the news section of DOL,it deserves better coverage than its going to get in this thread.

Any chance this can be made accessable on line as well? I ask because my situation means I'm unable to circulate this on paper or in person,but online it could be circulated easily. There are likely many in the bush in a similar way.