YOLO

The irony is that to have any control, via the Register, or a non-breeding contract, or guardianship, the other would-be breeder must themselves be regulated by the ANKC. But if they keep pushing people away, then that won't happen.

I didn't start this thread to bash breeders. But the way in which some dictate up front that all their puppies go on the LR, just seems illogical to me. Unless I'm missing something, limited register has only two effects: It prevents the owner from showing the dog It prevents another ANKC registered breeder from registering any offspring. And that's it, so what am I missing? The prospect of getting involved in dogs shows is daunting enough, why do they want ban new owners?? In regards to breeding, as I said it only effects another registered breeder (or somebody that wants to become one) An unregistered breeder (well-meaning amateur, backyard bodgy, or puppy farmer) will breed the dog regardless. As a breeder said above, they would know any existing ANKC Breeder and would have a discussion prior to selecting a puppy, so the blanket LR policy is largely irrelevant. Afterall, is the pinching of puppies between registered breeders really a huge problem? Which leaves the issue of new or prospective Registered Breeders. Surely this is an opportunity to engage with such people? Point out the responsibilities and challenges of becoming a registered breeder, and try to educate them? What's the worst that can happen? The Upfront Mandatory "LR ONLY" stance not only fails to engage, but pushes any wannabe breeder onto the backyard-breeder path.

My personal belief is that when feeding raw, it should only ever be human food. So yes I feed mine lamb offcuts, and chicken legs.

This is one of my questions. By all accounts the breeders in question are highly regarded, ethical, breeders looking to produce the most well-rounded dogs they can in accordance with standards. They are usually heavily involved in showing and/or trialling, and in many cases have gone to great lengths to introduce better bloodlines. And yet despite this they seem to be saying that they have no confidence in their pups?? And again, the lack of logic astounds me. If I am not an ANKC Registered Breeder, then your placing the dog on the LR doesn't effect me anyway. And sure, the majority of owners may not be interested in showing their dog, but that again just means its irrelevant. If anything shouldn't you be encouraging new participants. To be honest, my interest in dog-showing comes and goes. I'm never going to be a lifelong devotee, but with a suitable dog it is something I would like to at least look into.

Yeah, come visit Perth some time. Our pounds, shelters, and rescue organisations are full to overflowing, and the problem shows no sign of abating. And fact is that, whilst not ideal, we'd happily adopt a rescue dog in the current climate, but none are remotely suitable. All the descriptions read sadly the same "can't go to a home that has other dogs, cats, animals, or children" If one were to do a quick analysis of puppies being offered to sale, between here and on gumtree, majority are from moronic backyard operators, breeding whatever mongrels they could find. IF (and it's a huge if) the new legislation could curtail this, it would be a blessing. But I suspect that this will be just more rules applied only to responsible owners, and ignored by the others.

So the WA government has passed new legislation. It will require central registration of all dogs and Breeders. So the term "Registered Breeder" (already misappropriated by rando Internet Registrations) will now mean "Registered with the Government" Sadly this will mean that a "Registered Breeder" can sell whatever misbegotten pig-dogs they want, providing they comply with the rules. Also, part of this new system, will require the tracking of unsterilised bitches and their offspring. So I'm wondering if this becomes something akin to a "mongrel pedigree"?

I have been browsing some of the Breeders' ads, doing my research. And I'm a bit puzzled by the large number that say "all my Pups on the Limited Register, so no Breeding or Showing" It makes literally no sense to me, so I'm wondering what I'm missing? Let's say something unforeseen (or even fraudulent) happens, and in a Breeder's worst nightmare, one of their Dogs or Bitches ends up at a "Puppy Mill". What exactly is the LR going to achieve? The only possible effect it has is on another ANKC Registered Breeder, who are supposed to Breed responsibly and in accordance with the rules and codes of practice. A puppy farm, backyard breeder, or even just your average dill who lets their bitch get impregnated, isn't going to be stopped by the LR. And why the prohibition on Showing? Sure, most owners won't anyway, but shouldn't they be trying to encourage more people into Showing? I also wonder at the message it's sending. If dogs started out on a "non-breeding" register, but could be upgraded by winning shows, or being judged, then I think that would be fair enough? Or even if they said "Puppies will be placed on appropriate Register after evaluation" or some such? But saying ALL your pups go on the LR almost suggests that there's an inherent problem?

Asking cos I don't really understand how this works for a Dog, lol. I understand that it is somehow based on points. Is it 100 points to become "Australian Champion" and 1,000 points for Grand Champion? So say your dog is "the best" at the moment, and you win all the shows, how many would you need to win to get 100 points? And do you actually have to go national, cos I feel that would be pretty tough for people in WA. And what if your dog is "good" say top 5, but there is always one or 2 better, so they never quite win a show... Can you still rack up the points?

Recently, driving home along a relatively busy road, my passenger observed a council worker placing a dog into a plastic bag. Obviously a sad event, and not a particularly pleasant job. That afternoon there was a post on our community facebook page about a lost dog in that vicinity. Rather than scare the owner, I rang the Wanneroo Council Rangers to enquire. So, the next distressing thing is that if enquiring about a deceased pet, one has to speak to the "Waste Disposal" department. Yeah. They confirmed that, from the microchip, the poor boy was registered to the lady in question. But said they had been "unable to contact her." So I then had to inform this poor young lady, via messenger, that her boy was gone, and that his body had already been "taken care of". Obviously I didn't mention that the Wanneroo council dumps such animals in landfill. To me, there are just so many thing wrong with this story. Some arsehole hitting a dog and leaving it to die by the side of the road Council allocating the task to "Waste Disposal" Failure of the "microchip system" Council's incompassionate handling of remains.

There are good and bad everywhere, both in the Public and in Vets (or perhaps more to the point people running Vet Clinics) There is a particular "clinic" not far from us that employs only (cheap) foreign vets, who barely speak English, and all they want to do is upsell you useless products, such as "special shampoo" to treat a foot wound. And whilst I appreciate that everyone needs to be paid, businesses need to make a profit, and supplies are expensive, outright gouging does not win them many friends. Charging $4 per dose, where the retail price is less than $1, is IMHO completely unacceptable.

I can't imagine what you are going through, especially after a destructive relationship breakup. All I can say is that time will make it hurt a little less.

The overwhelming majority of dogs make "great companions. " This has nothing to do with their suitability or otherwise for various roles. If you're a farmer and need a dog to herd your sheep, then having a Kelpie as a "great companion" makes sense. If you live in an apartment, it doesn't. I mean, yes, sure, there are certainly breeds which over time tended to be bred for close association with their "masters" as opposed to others who were expected to live outdoor or even with their flocks. But that doesn't reflect on their overall suitability as pets or otherwise. And please understand, I'm not saying "you can't have breed X as a pet." I'm saying that owners need to know what they are buying, and need to understand the dog's history, attributes, and what it is & isn't suited to, and how it will interact with your environment. At least if you adopt a Greyhound as a pet, you know that you are getting a Greyhound. You can research the breed, understand what it needs, and appreciate any adjustments or precautions you need to take. The problem comes with people buying a "cute puppy" that is described as a "staffy cross" but in reality is a Pig-Dog.

I don't know how or when this pluralistic dogma came into vogue,but it should be obvious to anybody, that dog breeds differ markedly. And owners need to know and understand the differences. This belligerent and wilful stupidity is behind many of tragedies we see involving dogs. Dogs who are guilty of nothing worse that being exactly what they were bred to be. Not all dogs are perfect for every task, so we need to compromise, and know their limitations. Firstly there are the physical characteristics, which obviously vary markedly between breeds. Size, shape, weight, length of jaw, shape of the mouth, relative muscle size. These all impact what you dog can, and cannot do. Then you have temperament, and yes it's a real thing. Dogs of the same breed, whilst retaining the same physical characteristics, can be selectively bred over time to enhance or eliminate certain aspects of what you might call a dog's personality. So regardless of physical characteristics, some dogs suited for working environments, some for guard work, some for vermin control, some for gun work, whilst others are suited to active families and others to a more placid existence. I don't like to anthropomorphise, and the sad reality is that many dogs bred for "aggression" may in fact have been selectively bred for fear & anxiety. Finally there are what I think of as idiosyncrasies, or retained instinct. Traits which, once observed, have been selectively kept and even enhanced. We once owned a GSP, who yes, without any training or learned behaviour, began to "point" when she heard a strange noise. This doesn't mean to say that you can't train a dog. Obviously you can, and that training might enhance or even suppress some of the bred characteristics. Anthropomorphising is a huge problem, as it tends to make us think of dogs in terms of Right & Wrong, Good v Evil. We use terms like "vicious," "savage," or "aggressive". There are many snakes that will bite if threatened, but some of them can kill you. We don't call them vicious or savage, we just warn the public and take precautions. All of which is why we need to understand the origins of our dogs, and what they have been bred to do. I think we are often misguided because dogs are generally highly social and intelligent. Most dogs are capable of forming strong social bonds, and becoming loyal and affectionate family members. This often blinds owners to the other attributes. In recent decades there has been a lot of indiscriminate breeding of dogs for hunting purposes. This generally starts with crossing something with "high prey drive" with larger but more placid breed. Dogs that prove efficient at bringing down pigs and roos are then bred from, and the cycle continues. I'm not going to comment further on the barbarity of hunting for sport, except to say that a dog bred for its proficiency in attacking other animals, does not make a good suburban pet. (Regardless of how loyal they may be to your family.) Unfortunately these seem to form the bulk of the "rescue" population, and is it any wonder why? Cute puppies that grow quickly into large loud, boisterous, dogs.

I'm guessing you mean 100%, and 75%/25% ? Otherwise what breed is the other 50% of each parent?? So yes, basically, the bitch in question is 1/8 BC, and if bred with a purebred her pups would be 1/16. However Genetics are a little more complicated in reality. Some are only present on X chromozones, offspring can get different results depending on which they get from their Sire. Similarly there is DNA in the Mitocondria, which is different again, and only inherited from the mother. If you look at something as apparently simple as the colours in retrievers. There are two overriding sets that determine whether a dog will be black, brown, or yellow. Yet browns can vary from reddish Liver (flatcoats) to dark chocolate (in some Labs) and Yellow can be anywhere from almost pure white to a deep honey colour. And that's before you throw in patterns and other modifiers.

In Perth the most common temporary fencing is mesh panels, held in place by concrete-filled footings. There are a number of major problems with this: It is not designed to keep animals out, and a Basenji will certainly get underneath. They do nothing to stop dust, and you will be inundated with all the filth from the building site. They will often attach shade-cloth or similar to the fence, to stop dust and screen the property, in which case they simply blow either. 3 months is preposterous. It sounds like they are being typical lazy builder, always going for the easiest and cheapest solution. First of all, your council will give you contact details for the owners of adjoining properties. Secondly, be very careful what you agree to by way of encroachment . A parapet wall should not encroach onto your property, it should be wholly contained on their side of the property line. Note that a court order is easily obtained ONLY if you fail to respond, otherwise you are free to decline. They can still ask the court for permission, but are unlikely to be successful if your response was reasonable. They CAN erect an approved parapet wall without your consent. They must give you 7 days notice, and may only remove that portion of the fence necessary. That said, they will want access to your property to construct the wall, and they can't have that without your consent. You need to figure out a solution that works for YOU, and propose that in writing, You need to come up with a "temporary" fencing solution that works for you, and stipulate all the details in writing. For example that it must be solid to prevent dust and noise, must be secured to prevent being toppled by the wind, must have no gaps and not be able to be dug under, and specify a minimum height. Also specify its location (eg no more that 1m inside your boundary) that it must be in place and complete before any of the existing fence is removed, and that when removed your garden must be restored. The builders will of course demure, but I can tell you that anything is possible. A very common method is to use steel panels (a bit like colourbond, but much thicker and stronger) and they are simply driven into the ground using a backhoe attachment. It is called "Sheet Piling" and whilst it might seem like overkill, it would be a very effective solution.

I know somebody who did one of those ancestry tests. And on first glance it said that he had around 5% each of Nigerian and Ashkenazi Jew. Now given the family tree is well known quite far back, that's a nonsense. However, that's not what it actually says. What it's saying is that he shares 5% of his DNA with an average Nigerian and Ashkenazi. Now if you consider the amount of Colonial involvement in Nigeria, and the very nature of the Ashkenazi, that makes perfect sense.

Firstly, I am sorry you are going through this. You have my utmost sympathy and prayers. Many people have very strong views on this. I'm not going to criticise them for their decisions or actions, but they have no right to tell you that you should have already done it. That's just hurtful and unhelpful. You are the only one is a position to judge and make the decision, ALL we can do is offer advice. Please do not allow yourself to be bullied into making a decision you will regret. You need to make the right call, but it needs to be yours. Asking "how do you want to remember your dog?" is utter nonsense. Hopefully you will long remember their whole life, and no old dog ends their life in their prime. It's true that dogs are not very good at communicating pain, and that they will suffer in silence, and so we need to make decisions for them. But you can judge by their actions. My Jasper is 16, and I know he lives with discomfort, but he also knows his limitations. He's extremely deaf, and I imagine that if if he could process that realisation it would make him sad, but he just lives with that reality. He's on Carprofen now, and it has made a world of difference, which for me is also a positive sign. I can see that he is in far less pain than he was. He still prances when he's excited, and that's a good sign. I'm going to assume that as his owner, you're able to best judge his level of pain, and when it is triggered. Is he able to play laying down and/or be rolled on his back for tummy rubs? Or is the pain constant? Does he appear to always be in pain when walking, or is it only specific movements such as climbing? You really need to evaluate how much pain he's in, and make your decision based on that. If by falling, you mean that his legs are giving out in pain when he tries to squat, then yes sadly that's a big negative indicator. Best wishes in making what I know is an extremely difficult and traumatic decision.

Will be interesting to see exactly what this involves. The problem is labelling something as a "puppy farm" based on what? Volume? I have less a problem conceptually with a large-scale operation that is professionally, ethically, and responsibly run. Rather than the boobs breeding mongrels in their back-yards in unsanitary and unsafe conditions. (And usually overbreeding, every season.) And what's this BS about stocking pet-shops with "rescue pups"? Even now, rescue pups are rare, and only occur when somebody surrenders an already pregnant bitch. So where do they expect to find all these pups?? Even if they actually mean rescue dogs, where will they come from? Unless they mean to continue to allow the backyard bogans to continue selling their mongrels on gumtree?

Like so many things, it boils down to something quite simple.. You can buy a large flat-link slip collar for literally a couple of bucks. And it will last forever. I've lost a few over the years, but they will never wear-out, almost never break (usually a defective weld on the end ring if it does) and it will never go out of vogue. All of which is an unmitigated disaster for the multi-billion dollar pet-accessory industry. How can they exploit pet owners if they don't have something new to sell you every season? And of course, nothing motivates like guilt. The idea that you might be harming your dog if you're not using the latest fad brand-name accessory, is a powerful selling tool. The problem is exacerbated because some well-meaning owners, by dint of their own stupidity , are irresponsible, and seek to overcome this by being indulgent. I live in a beautiful area, dominated by large lakes which are surrounded by parks and nature reserves. There are warning signs everywhere, yet I see idiots all the time exercising their dogs either off-leash or on those stupid wind-up things. So how much do you love your dogs? I love mine so much that if I had to, I would yank them off their feet and out of harms way. For that reason I prefer a collar that I know they can't escape from, that will actually get tighter the harder I have to pull, and that won't suddenly sprong apart because its fitted with ease-of-use plastic clips. I'll trust my luggage to those clips, but not my dogs.