Weasels

He looks fine to me! Muscly and just a shadow of ribs. Fox is slightly skinnier I'd say and she's healthy as an ox Edit - we're actually happier to keep Fox on the lean side because she loves to jump so much, so I try to reduce the load on her joints. We let Weez carry a bit more weight because he doesn't jump much.

Removed due to technical difficulties...

what a beautiful dog! Sounds like you are doing good things Remember it's only been a week, and his life has changed A LOT (for the better!) so he might be able to learn the rules better once he's settled in a bit. Just some quick thoughts - you could teach him a 'go to your bed/crate/mat' and get a treat as a (hopefully more rewarding) alternative to harassing you onn the couch. - when Weez tried to mouth my feet for attention I'd give him a toy to chew so he still had an outlet for his chewing desire/excess energy. I'd play a game of tug too to give him something else to focus on. Good news is a young ACD should be easy to train

I just saw a dog trot past with some lobster :rolleyes: They really have the OH wrapped around their little claw!

Merry Christmas all, especially Bondi and Millie! Hope you all have a great day

Perfect! He's a star :D

But can he turn left?

I have to disagree, I think it is possible to develop a new dog breed (which would be accepted by the ANKC), I'd hate to think that some line has been draw that no new breeds could come after. I struggle with the health argument because are there really any guarantees? But ethics poses a more interesting dilemma, it's a really interesting discussion, hmm do I brave starting a new topic? ;) . Well currently with known breeds there are certain tests run and certain issues known to be associated with that breed.. This varies depending on breed but I know with an aussie to ask about cea, hc, hips/ elbows, and MDR1 as a start and also (thanks to a friends lesson learnt the hard way) am aware enough to also check that the parents aren't Merle Merle to avoid issues there. With a new breed I do not know what I am signing on for, indeed the earlier generations would hold no promises with physical attributes much less traits relating to medical/ genetic conditions.. It would take an incredible amount of culling and very aggressive restrictive breeding practices to introduce a genuine new breed that would take generations to be able to offer anywhere near the predictability we can expect (to a certain level) of the current breeds available now. I do not think we have drawn a line I can for better or worse see many of the 'oodles' that are the current trend eventually making it to a recognized breed status and indeed it wasn't till the 90's that Aussies were recognized themselves (from memory correct me if I'm wrong) I cannot see how ethically a new breed can be introduced or how it is likely to happen without a huge number of misfit dogs being produced and how in a society where there is already such a problem with misfit outcasts of potential new breeds do we justify working towards creating a new breed when the ones we have already cater so well to any number of situations. (may be garbled I'll check at a sane hour ;) , but I hope my point comes across ok) But why is it suddenly unethical to create a dog breed now when it wasn't in the past? If anything it should be more humane now, since we can run genetic tests; understand non-mendelian and atypical patterns of inheritance; and have modern surgical techniques allowing sterilisation and rehoming of non-breeding stock (rather than a shot to the head or a bag of pups in the river). We even have the entire dog genome sequenced so we can continue to develop more tests as needed. There are plenty of dogs in existing breeds that are classed as misfit outcasts (if by that you mean not appropriate to continue the line), they have perfectly lovely homes I can't think why we would need a new breed myself (unless I can find one that replies to my emails and does the dishes :rolleyes:) but as a hypothetical arguement I'm not seeing why it was OK then but not OK now. (efg)

RS I understand - I haven't walked the dogs since Monday now I know OH is on holidays and he can do it at a more reasonable hour! :p

Thanks Greytmate for your thoughtful reply. I must admit though a part of me still finds it strange that we put so much more planning and research into the conception of our dogs than most children I am inclined to agree with Aussielover's point too, coming from the POV of having a young (recently developed) breed whose only requirement is to be healthy and able to work. After a bit of research I'm also convinced that some working kelpie lines even have dingo - a different subspecies - thrown in (possibly to improve heat tolerance). But then many of the breeders of these dogs were quite prepared to cull pups that didn't make the grade. As with most dog stuff, I guess it all comes down to what you want them to be & do. And with tens of thousands of years of breeding for purpose has come certain physical limitations that we need to be mindful of, in some breeds more than others. I'm still interested in the reason behind the rotty addition if you come back to this thred Jacqui

yes, and time of day. Absolutely, both the beaches and the people are much nicer in the morning! The few times I have been in the evening it has been much windier and I've had a couple of (minor) items stolen. And yet I've left thongs, leads, etc. at the end of the beach hundreds of times in the morning and they were safe every single time. This is a video of one of the dog beaches just south of Garden Island (about 5-10 mins drive from Kwinana beach) taken last summer - sorry about the shaky camera! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jCCJ2CkbAYc&feature=youtu.be

+1 dog and 1 human

I'm interested in this statement as an intellectual argument. What about it is unethical? My background is in ecology and evolution and I have a hard time getting my head around domestic dogs - breeds within a subspecies within the species of 'wolf'. Any other animal on earth and we wouldn't bat an eyelid at interbreeding at this level (in fact we'd probably try to facilitate it to maintain genetic diversity). But OTOH, dogs are something that we made, and we need to take responsibility for, so can't really be compared to any other animal in the extent of artificial selection we have performed on them... Conversely, what is the benefit of throwing a rotty into a dobe lineage? What about dobes were they trying to change?

I knew it didn't look right

I always thought single 'n', but then I don't think I've even seen one in the flesh so my opinion doesn't hold much weight The older members of my family always used 'Alsation' rather than GSD too.

This got me googling - found this interesting snippet - Reference here

Did you go to the 'seaweed beach' further south towards Waikiki? There is a big variation in the quality of beaches, with Rockingham foreshore and safety bay being very narrow beaches, but there are much nicer ones in the area I haven't been to Kwinana beach myself yet, but I might check it out next week (wooo holidays!) (E: quality also varies considerably depending on the time of year)

The poor sighthounds seem to be copping it lately

I looked after a couple of husky x BCs recently (also litter brothers) - they spent an hour walking around peeing on everything and then fell asleep Fortunately they were older fellows so not much trouble :D Trout & Twig look very happy, must be a big relief to their mum! I hope their dad gets better soon

Yep, that's about what I'd expect from peta

I'm all for the right dog for the right person, but I think these posts are over-playing the risks of rescue and underestimating the risks of breeders. Adopting an adult rescue dog means you can see what you're getting moreso than a puppy. Good training and where necessary the intervention of a good behaviourist can resolve many issues. Even the best of pedigree parents can have a pup with problems, and these might not become apparent until later in life. And even if the dog is a perfect specimen, it could have a non-genetic problem, experience or injury which renders it just as unsuitable for the desired purpose no matter how many years you have spent training. Taking any life into your family is a big risk. A breeder (or rescue of course) cannot guarantee that you will never have problems with your pup. I'm with Greytmate on this one. All people can do is test and try to match dogs (from wherever) and homes with the information available at the time. I'd hate for people to read this thread and think that buying from a breeder makes their pup physically and temperamentally bulletproof, whereas adopting from rescue means their dog is a cluster of problems waiting to happen. edit: too slow. what the last 2 posts said

They drive Weez nuts too. I wanted to buy one to work on desensitising but OH refused to scoot on one while I fed Weez *pout*

Aw Trina, but I would love to meet my fellow roadtripper :D Perhaps you could borrow a dog - or substitute a kid ;)

No probs, and I understand the desire to sleep in Although try as I might the dogs always decide that if humans are sleeping past 6:30am then action must be taken! At least this morning it was just a couple of licks on my arm, which is preferable to the woofs. So I'll be out and about either way - it's not worth the constant harrassment throughout the day if they don't get their morning sprints after a ball :D Edit. Mmmmm mango :D

Yay! :D Although I'm not sure Weez is up to the pressure of respresenting all kelpiekind