moosmum

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.

I hope I can say this as well as i'd like with out doing a book here. I see pet shops s a symptom,not the cause. Yes,I have a LOT of problems with most establishments selling live animals.Not all. I don't see the solution to be banning the sale of live animals out right.There are much worse conditions puppies and kittens can be sold from.Pet shops are at least very open to public scrutiny on a daily basis.They have controlls,regulations etc. As to the source of their pups,yep,some come from puppy farms,but I know of many people out here in the sticks who breed once a year and sell directly to pet shops. Pet shops are catering to highly lucrative market,in a very public way. If you ban sale of live pets,where are their customers going to turn,bearing in mind they want a pup and they want it now? They will turn directly tro the puppy mills,backyard breeders and free internet sites,etc.All very hard to police and regulate,all easier to hide . These places will be much harder ti influence in any way, less easy to get to accept responsible change. Attention will turn even more to regulating these places and the result will be that in the end,the only ones able to breed dogs will be those willing to accept thatany dog breeding operation at all be run according to such strict standards and regulations that only mass breeders,or farm style operations,can afford to breed at all. We will end up with dogs bred purely on a comercial basis,sold to those requiring a revokable at any time licence to own dogs. Fewer dogs kept at all,fewer people exposed to dogs or with any real meaningful knowledge,and a continuing cycle of decline. There will not be universaly accepted solutions through legislation,there will always be those seeking to enforce more to bring about the change they see as essential. I firmly believe changing perceptions on pet ownership is the only way to go.Maybe slower,but far more effective and less damaging in the long run. We must 1st stop the divisions we see all the time and allow and encourage people to take pride in their pets and WANT to learn more,no matter the origins or breeding. It would take an essay to say what I'd like more effectively,but I'd be happy to write one.

I agree. Besides,divide and conquer is working too well for those who want to impose ever more legislation.

I realy like this idea,but think it should be clearly stated through out that legislation is not an option,as its just driving dog ownership and experience further under gound. I also think cheaper desexing would make a huge difference. Theres been a lot of great ideas in this thread in particular. I don't think you can ever get through to every one.Some people are just morons,but not many actualy choose to be. Peer pressure would also see more being reported (or helped) once the message starts to get out.

In response to your comments - of course, yes, they were generalisations and I'm very well aware that all registered breeders are not necessarily ethical, or that all pet shops are not necessarily unethical dodgy used-car type sales outlets. I did not cater for all the ifs, buts and maybes scenarios for the purpose of not having a post that went for pages upon pages. My comments were based on my own experiences in looking for a dog as I spoke to many suppliers including pet shops, BYBs (even though I didn't know they were this at the time) and registered breeders. As a relative newbie myself, I'm happy to be educated and am very open to constructive feedback. However, making assumptions about what I seem to be insinuating (especially when they are not correct) and then labelling me as elitist and arrogant is over-stepping the mark fairly significantly and getting very personal. Thank you very much for berating me and I'm sincerely glad that you've taken your frustration out on me which means that hopefully someone else will miss out on being a target. I hope you have a lovely night Sorry Conztruct, that you took my reply so personaly.Yes,it is a frustrating situation,and we all tend to be blunt to get our message accross with out confusing the readers. However,I did find your solution an offensive one,and set out to explain why. I did not label you,but the attitudes that I do see as dangerous. My assuptions about what you seemed to be insinuating seemed to me fair given the way you set it out in black and white. We all have to be so careful that what we say,me included. Its not my intention to belittle you,but point out a too common problem here that drives away the very people we hope to educate and brings division so that the dog world is fractured with every one working against every one else. No need to apologise - no offence taken. The only reason I said anything was due to the elitist, arrogant tag which I didn't necessarily find offensive but wanted to quickly correct. I always make it my policy to check my assumptions (whether I perceive them to be fair or not) are indeed correct but everyone works differently - the assumptions you made were not correct and do not reflect my opinion and I did not want to be "guilty" by association in relation to your general comments in the response. I apologise to all the other posters for the completely OT post. I think the decline in the purebred dog world (which is a hobby basically for most except a few of the larger scale more professional breeders) is largely a sign of the times and something that is being experienced in a whole range of areas. A lot of people are very impulsive now and aren't prepared to research, don't want to wait and let's face it are looking for the best price too. I don't think it's so much anything people who supply dogs of any kind are doing right or wrong, but just the way people are now - educating them to behave differently is extremely difficult because you are looking at changing a culture that is facilitated in just about every aspect of society now. I agree,and think most of the issues being discussed come back to changing peoples attitudes and how they see pets as more acessories than living beings with their own personalities, needs and and at the risk of sounding anthropmorphic,feelings.

In response to your comments - of course, yes, they were generalisations and I'm very well aware that all registered breeders are not necessarily ethical, or that all pet shops are not necessarily unethical dodgy used-car type sales outlets. I did not cater for all the ifs, buts and maybes scenarios for the purpose of not having a post that went for pages upon pages. My comments were based on my own experiences in looking for a dog as I spoke to many suppliers including pet shops, BYBs (even though I didn't know they were this at the time) and registered breeders. As a relative newbie myself, I'm happy to be educated and am very open to constructive feedback. However, making assumptions about what I seem to be insinuating (especially when they are not correct) and then labelling me as elitist and arrogant is over-stepping the mark fairly significantly and getting very personal. Thank you very much for berating me and I'm sincerely glad that you've taken your frustration out on me which means that hopefully someone else will miss out on being a target. I hope you have a lovely night Sorry Conztruct, that you took my reply so personaly.Yes,it is a frustrating situation,and we all tend to be blunt to get our message accross with out confusing the readers. However,I did find your solution an offensive one,and set out to explain why. I did not label you,but the attitudes that I do see as dangerous. My assuptions about what you seemed to be insinuating seemed to me fair given the way you set it out in black and white. We all have to be so careful that what we say,me included. Its not my intention to belittle you,but point out a too common problem here that drives away the very people we hope to educate and brings division so that the dog world is fractured with every one working against every one else.

In response to your comments - of course, yes, they were generalisations and I'm very well aware that all registered breeders are not necessarily ethical, or that all pet shops are not necessarily unethical dodgy used-car type sales outlets. I did not cater for all the ifs, buts and maybes scenarios for the purpose of not having a post that went for pages upon pages. My comments were based on my own experiences in looking for a dog as I spoke to many suppliers including pet shops, BYBs (even though I didn't know they were this at the time) and registered breeders. As a relative newbie myself, I'm happy to be educated and am very open to constructive feedback. However, making assumptions about what I seem to be insinuating (especially when they are not correct) and then labelling me as elitist and arrogant is over-stepping the mark fairly significantly and getting very personal. Thank you very much for berating me and I'm sincerely glad that you've taken your frustration out on me which means that hopefully someone else will miss out on being a target. I hope you have a lovely night

This" Us Vs THEM" IMO is where we all get ourselves in strife.Every one trying to not just see things done ethicaly,but to "bring tha bastards down" I believe pet shops CAN be run ethicaly,and no doubt some are.So why persecute all pet shops? I do think its quite posible to work with pet shops,and them to work with ethical breeders,if creative thought is is used. conztruct, I agree with your 1st sentence,but the generalizations in your examples are hardly fair in the way this is worded. You lump Registered ,ethical breeders into one very positive basket,that seems to insinuate all registerd breeders fit in there too.They don't automaticaly and there are many pure breeders telling their " consumers" anything about health,size and fitness to make a sale.Many of whom are motivated by profit. These are the people who have repeatedly given ammo' to those persecuting pure breeders. Them you lump all BYBs in the same category as puppy farmers or pet shops as being purely profit motivated and with no ethics or on going care.Sorry,but just because you will not hear about them on dole,does not mean they are non exsistent.Maybe harder to find,but these divisive attitudes are helping no one.So often you see newbies to DOL being crucified before they have a chance to learn better,.Wouldn't it be better if we can assume if they are interested enough to come here,its because of a genuine desire to learn? In your pragraph where you ask,What is the solution? I find your solution very offensive. Who cares? Every one except the registered,ethical breeders who you insinuate includes ALL of the registerd breeders! When registerd breeders can claim no one in their ranks is profit motivated,that all stock is clear of genetic health problems,that all puppy buyers are provided with on going care and life time guarantees etc,and includes no puppy farmers then people might listen to these arguments. Attitudes like this are what is turning people away in droves from pure breed dogs,and great informative sites like DOL.It is elitist, arrogant and damaging. The puppy industry should be very different re:protectionism.Otherwise it becomes nothing more than that..An industry.

Good luck, I hope he he finds his way home. The same happened to some friends/neighbours of ours when they moved 5 ks away.We went to visit them one evening and on our way home drove past the old house 3/4 days later) and and saw him hiding in the scrub on the side of the road in the dark. We opened the car door and called him,he was soo happy to see familiar faces! Took him back next morning. So yeah,check the old place too! Perhaps ride that way with the horses?

While I agree with this to some extent,its not enough on its own. We have many pure breeds in pet shops too,and if thats where the demand turns to,then i'm sure the puppy farmers etc will just provide more pure breeds for the market. I think you would rather need to promte the idea that buying directly from the producer is the safest option for both the buyer and the pups/dogs. It gives the chance to see both parents and assess their health, temperaments and conditions in their surroundings. Allows youto obseve behaviour in more natural conditions. Gives you the chance to discuss breed traits,care,health and suitability with the person who should know best what they are striving to acheive in their breeding programs. IMO promoting pure bred dogs is realy up to the organisations representing them, and their members. There will always be those who for whatever reasons,are not interested in buying a pure breed. I do think though that there is little info. regarding pure breeds or where to find them for the general public.But more important is the knowledge that breed breed traits and history,the origins or original purpose, affects breed traits and behaviour. Buyers need to be more aware of that fact and it should be a consideration in any dog brought into your life if its to fit in. If that idea can be got through,more would research pure breeds anyway. The sum of a dog is more than size and coat.

Sorry off topic....Hate to get technical but you can actually milk a billy goat....I will get the ladies name and stud if you like. ;) :D I will pass on that one thanks.I hope the goats are de- scented! Pungent milk.

Sorry folks, but I'm going to say education yet again. I firmly believe that animal studies,with a focus on responsible domestic animal ownership is long over due as part of the school cirriculum(sp?) Plants are studied as part of basic science,from propagation to to photosynthesis and more. Animals have never been included in this,possibly because at one time every one had some experience with animals in their own homes or close by.Thats no longer the case and it shows. The 1st thread in this series mentioned examples already,but to give another,I was once asked when milking my goats if the billy goat could be milked too! :D And this from a country raised woman with 2 children.And yes,she was serious. The benefits of knowing what you want or are trying to acheive with a pet is naturaly going to promote a knowledge of an animals purpose/back ground as best practice. Edited to add: I understand you are after more immediate sugestions Steve,so I will drop it (for these threads.

A GOOD breeder who knows their dogs and has spent the time observing and interacting with the pups is the best judge of the puppy to suit you. The most dominant is not always the most confident.You can have a very confident pup who is not easily intimidated,but not interested in asserting himself all the time over a much more dominant pup who the breeder should recognise as needing a particularly strong handler.(in the case of dominant strains for example) Its all going to be relative according to the litters and their backgrounds.You might have a particularly dominant strain to start with. The pup who appears the most confident at a visit might in reality just be the most active/reactive and energetic. Size can change several times in the puppies early growth periods. IMO nothing can replace good observation skills and experience on the part of a good breeder,combined with your honesty about the home and situation the pup will be living in,and what you expect of your dog. Pups innate personalities can be pretty complex.