m-j

So are you saying that the short sharp version closed the organisations down completely or they went OS, or was it that the participants just had to change their culture, no compromises, so the industry could survive?

How is a 47% reduction of pups being bred in the 12 months prior to the ban being announced not an example of a reform being implemented and enforced??? Having to pay a $1500.00 per pup bond will most certainly reduce the numbers even more (a litter of 6 pups will cost an extra $9000.00 to produce on top of all the other 1000s of dollars of expenses), if they don't pay there is no point breeding the litter as they won't be able to race. This reform will be very easy to enforce. Money being spent on research for better conditions for the dogs not an example of reforms not being implemented?? If the reforms make the industry an non viable proposition then it will die a slow death and the dogs will not die en masse how can that not be good for the dogs?? You mentioned in a previous post about members not putting their hands up for the dogs that don't make it, I am one who has and I know of others so your statement saying that we don't is very misinformed.

The same genes, it turns out, help govern sociability in our species, and are implicated in neurological problems ranging from autism to ADHD. That is odd as neither autistic people and people with ADHD are renowned for their sociability, that's not to say they can't be. however I have noticed a couple of my dogs seem to instantly like autistic people, one in particular and the autistic people I know like dogs, even when they have had no experience with them they just seem to have a repoire

I'm inclined to agree.

That is just backing up what we have all said would be great, but people are people. just going to training isn't going to work it needs to be ongoing, which is where I found most people that weren't dog fanatics fell down. They just weren't interested enough.

Other hereditary things are screened for why not? If it stops dogs ending up in shelters, having a horrible life because they're not valued, the bitch going through a bad time every time she is in pup and has whelped them etc..... Plus just because they are entire doesn't mean hormones can't go awry. I had a bitch that did the doggy equivalent of bursting into tears at the drop of a hat when in season, poor thing she must have been feeling awful, the solution was get her desexed, consistently happy dog. Obviously I'm only guessing hormones where the culprit as no tests were done, but the results indicated this could be the case.

...seems someone has to do it as the RSPCA is too busy because they have to euthanize all the dogs with behaviour issues... ETA: ...now that is really interesting stuff: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/45251733_Behavioral_Reasons_for_Relinquishment_of_Dogs_and_Cats_to_12_Shelters ...some quotes: ...The NCPPSP RegionalShelter Study found that behavioral problems, including aggression toward people or nonhuman animals, were the most frequently given reasons for canine relinquishment... and ...Neutered female dogs and cats and neutered male dogs were more frequent in the behavioral category of relinquishment. Yes but if their parents had been desexed non of them would have ended up in the shelters. ...you talking about the dog owners' parents or the dogs' parents?....I guess it doesn't matter as both options are true :D - at least if you would de-sex them early enough...but then, if I follow this approach, the only way to end that dogs will end up in pounds is to have no dogs at all, :laugh: of course not it was said with tongue in cheek, but you can't argue with the logic. While I agree with you re training should be mandatory, we will have to agree to disagree on leaving dogs entire. While leaving them entire does have it's merits for their health not convinced that it really makes that much difference to their behaviour, there are so many variables that can be applied to behaviour at any given moment and or with an individual. ETA Oops I cut out instead of bolding the bit of your post I was referring to.

...seems someone has to do it as the RSPCA is too busy because they have to euthanize all the dogs with behaviour issues... ETA: ...now that is really interesting stuff: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/45251733_Behavioral_Reasons_for_Relinquishment_of_Dogs_and_Cats_to_12_Shelters ...some quotes: ...The NCPPSP RegionalShelter Study found that behavioral problems, including aggression toward people or nonhuman animals, were the most frequently given reasons for canine relinquishment... and ...Neutered female dogs and cats and neutered male dogs were more frequent in the behavioral category of relinquishment. Yes but if their parents had been desexed non of them would have ended up in the shelters.

..well, I recall a thread where I was called names from a few members here when I mentioned that I walked my dog even though when she is on heat... I understand that de-sexing can be one tool in the box for good dog management, and in special scenarios it can add quality to a dog's live, however, IMO the public presentation is IMO pretty one-sided and misinforming....and many people fall into this trap just to struggle later with all the unwanted consequences. Hence I thought demonstrating that dogs in heat (and in most other states) are still normal dogs via the footage might help some dog owners to make a more balanced decision. Unfortunately some authorities and organisations push the 'mandatory de-sexing approach' instead of a 'mandatory obedience training approach' for dog owners. While both of these options might be hard to enforce anyway, I think the later one is much smarter and would achieve by far the better results. I have only had two dogs with incontinence know of only one other but I've seen a heap of pups that were oops litters and the results from those oops litters in some cases were quite sad, in my mind doesn't even compare. I agree with the mandatory training but it is far more time consuming and as you said who's going to police it as people who want to come to training without being forced don't keep it up. Women I know that have been desexed couldn't be happier because all the issues associated with hormone changes are gone. If I had to have another child I would definitely opt for a surrogate mother as I turned into a human version of Cujo in the first trimester of both pregnancies I didn't like myself and way I responded to normal situations but I couldn't help myself even after 36 years of conditioning on how to react/behave in those situations.

I have had many desexed dogs also, don't see that they are that screwed up either even when being entire for several years and then desexed. I think it is more important to desex for the general dog owner (it's no secret that heaps are very irresponsible)as it prevents unwanted pups and pups that aren't looked after properly which can really do a dog's head in. Ok so the tactics used to achieve this may not be so factual but if it works for the greater good so be it.

...so it has something to do with my pet hate ....de-sexing respectively if you leave them entire.... nope, ...the 'speciality' (for some people) is that her behaviour respectively response to my recall (whether I use a whistle, call her or just whistle) is - like always - very good, even though.... :) ....and it has something to do with her unchanged responsive behaviour ... Where did you see it? If there was she didn't show much interest in it. ...no, nothing else, especially no other dogs.... ETA:...all clues are now out there, you just have to put 1 and 1 together.... ...no other dogs - not that the presence of other dog would change here response to my cues much, but the other dogs might be not so well trained... so what could happen to an entire bitch where a lot of people think that it turns them into some kind of monsters, make them totally disobedient, wipes out all the reflexes you trained over years to override all kind of drives, and let them take off straight away to follow their instincts if you risk to let them run off-leash? HUH??? What difference does being entire make, none that I noticed over the years, unless they are actually ovulating and there is a male dog there that they think a suitable candidate to be a dad but if they are well conditioned they will respond they do it without thinking, probably think damn these conditioned responses when you remove them from the male tho, after a bit of experience with the scenario I just mentioned they might go nah the last few times I did this I couldn't do what I wanted to do, unless their food drive overrides reproducing, which in the right conditions i.e. the dog is hungry it will, Maslow's hierarchy of need.... sorry I still don't get what is so special??

Where did you see it? If there was she didn't show much interest in it.

nope, ...the 'speciality' (for some people) is that her behaviour respectively response to my recall (whether I use a whistle, call her or just whistle) is - like always - very good, even though.... :) I'm intrigued I'll play....even tho she's a collie and there's a bull there with no movement except eating, taking absolutely no notice of her that charged her at some time in the past???

No don't see it but lots of Pavlov though from both you and her.

Interesting theory but I've also had an old drover, farm hand who has a reputation for having had really good working dogs (I was told this by other people not him) say that it was a load of crock. What about all the other dogs that are obedient, loyal and will also follow their owners to the end of the earth that haven't been spat at, how did they become like that? I inclined to think maybe preparedness and being a good owner has something to do with it.

If he is really concerned about rocking the boat (some bosses wouldn't like upsetting the client even though it is an WHS issue) he could arm himself with a pocket full of treats, that can be thrown out in scatter rather than a long lasting treat as the dog may put himself in the way and not be happy to move and that could place them in even greater risk of being bitten. Plus the treats can be given for behaviour that is desirable i.e. just being there, not harassing it can be a safe way of moving the dog around where they want the dog to go is where they throw the treat. If the owner is one of those idiots that likes their dog pushing people around throwing it treats may motivate him to get it away from him as they don't want their dog made "soft". The treats must be thrown behind the dog that way it will be inclined to stand back rather than close as they learn that there is no point standing close as the treat is always thrown behind. If the dog harasses him because the treats are on him he can put them somewhere the dog can't access them, but he can.

I still don't think that is a good argument thousands on unemployment benefits and being educated to do another job isn't going to cost for years??? Looking after redundant Greyhounds as they said they were going eventually make a plan for ha ha isn't going to cost. 53 million is chicken feed. Jobs that you can live off are very very hard to get educated or otherwise. Greyhounds haven't made money for them through gambling for years, from what I've been told, that's why the TAB didn't help.

The up side is there isn't 10acres of land smack bang in the middle of some of the most expensive real estate in the world, it won't be so easy for them.

She didn't know the dog was going to be euthed when she told me it needed to stay at the clinic. I didn't know. When I left the vet to go back to the kennels I had to get hold of the owner and tell him. When he found out the dog was going to stay in and he didn't want to pay the bill for that, he then told me to tell the vet to euth her. Yes you're right it does happen when people all get tarred with the same brush and the ones doing the judging think they know even though they really don't.

It was rushed through because it is a land grab, from the rumours I've heard the developers already have their hands up for Wentworth Park saying pick me. To add insult to injury they are not from Australia. The Greens well anything for a vote. While I honestly do understand how you feel I have also been on the other side of the coin from working in the industry. I took a dog to the vet she had been bitten on the leg by her neighbour as she was trying to steal his bone. The vet who didn't know me took xrays and informed me that infection had got into the bone and she couldn't send the dog home with me she needed to stay there. I knew what the owner was like and I knew he wasn't going to pay for the dog to stay at the vet and yes he said put it down, I tried to get the dog but he appeared to think I had an ulterior motive. I made a special trip into town so I could be with the dog as she was being euthed as I'm walking out the car bawling my eyes out the older vet who knew me was walking out with me saying how sorry he was that he had been away when I originally came in and that he was unable to change the young vets mind and how he wished I had been his patient as he would have let me take the dog knowing I would have treated her and not let her suffer in any way, talk about a triple whammy, mistrust from both industries (except the older vet) and the only real loser in the whole scenario a dead dog that didn't need to be. I'd had better days. I also have known lovely owners who I really liked it takes all kinds to make a world. ETA I was actually surprised at what the young vet told me as there was very little swelling and the dog wasn't lethargic at all, but I'm not a vet. My old boy had osteomyelitis in one of his toes (he tore the nail slightly at the base, bacteria got into the base of the nail, spread up into the bone) and he showed no signs of any discomfort, either. The only reason I noticed was he had some lick staining on one particular toe. Initial course of broad spectrum ABs did nothing. Second course of much stronger ABs seemed to start working but then stopped. We made the choice to amputate that section of toe before the infection got any further. We were very lucky in that not only was the infection just in the toe, but in the very last bone of the toe, which meant we had time to try other things and when it did have to come off, it was a quick, cheap and easy surgery that he recovered from really well. Osteomyelitis in a leg bone could be a whole other issue though and could require complete removal of that leg so I can understand the younger vet's reasoning. If the owner was a tightarse, the prospect of a heap of money spent to end up with a three-legged dog.. I doubt they would've been keen on that. Also, if the owner refuses to sign over the dog, the young vet was (unfortunately) right to refuse to give the dog to you. She would have been breaking the law to do so. It's sad that the dog ended up dead just because the owner was too selfish/stupid to just let her go to someone else but then, I've heard of perfectly healthy greys being destroyed because the owner doesn't want someone else to make money off a dog that they failed with. I think it's maybe less about the actual money and a bit more about the pride. Which when you think about it, is even more disgustingly selfish. She refused to send the dog home with me prior to contacting the owner. She told me that they could treat it better at the clinic. I also didn't see the x-rays She didn't even give me a chance as you were given. The older, more experienced, just as caring vet who knew me was prepared to though I did find it odd. The way things are now the owner couldn't have told me to euth the dog. I worked in a rearing kennel the dogs weren't racing As he came from Tassie (he couldn't see his dogs) and had about 6 dogs with us he probably thought that I was going to take it to race because Id noticed it was fast or something like that who knows. I wonder if that was because they suspected the dog would not be returned for treatment or that medication regime would not be complied with. Although as I understand it, their legal obligations don't actually extend to preventing the withholding of veterinary care. The law might be different up there but down here, if a vet suspects you won't return with an animal who requires care, the only thing they can really do (legally) is report it to the RSPCA for follow-up (which many won't do because it can discourage people from bringing their animals in to the vet to start with). That aside, the cheap, short-term treatment would most likely just be ABs and some anti-inflammatories and those can be given just fine at home. I think I would've been wanting to know exactly what treatment they were starting and why they felt the dog was better off staying at the clinic- considering a home environment might be better for a number of reasons. If you have legal responsibility for an animal (which, as defined by the AWA, you would, as a trainer or rearer), they can't just refuse to give the dog back to you. Unless the bill hadn't been paid yet- that makes it a whole different story. I've seen dogs (pet dogs, not greyhounds) withheld from their owners at clinics because the owner turned up to collect the dog with no money to pay the bill. This is what I believe except not they, just her. I had been going to that vet clinic for nearly 20yrs I had never seen her before, the older vet many times. The older vet did tell me he tried to get her to change her mind but he couldn't override her decision as I wasn't his patient. They have given me dogs before without the bill being paid, she euthed the dog without the bill being paid and she did look surprised I had turned up just to say goodbye I didn't need to be there. During the initial visit I did ask questions but I'm not a vet, so in reality who am I to say she is wrong and I had duty of care to the dog and the owner to do what I was told by the expert as to what was best for the dog, plus I had to get back to the kennels as I hadn't finished what I needed to do there. I didn't talk to the older vet until after the dog was euthed. If any of the other vets there, who all knew me, had treated the dog, I would have been able to take her home. Just a very sad circumstance and while I don't really know I'm guessing she did pre judge me as a scumbag greyhound person to say that she wouldn't release the dog despite other vets saying it would be ok kind of points to that. I never saw her after that.

It was rushed through because it is a land grab, from the rumours I've heard the developers already have their hands up for Wentworth Park saying pick me. To add insult to injury they are not from Australia. The Greens well anything for a vote. While I honestly do understand how you feel I have also been on the other side of the coin from working in the industry. I took a dog to the vet she had been bitten on the leg by her neighbour as she was trying to steal his bone. The vet who didn't know me took xrays and informed me that infection had got into the bone and she couldn't send the dog home with me she needed to stay there. I knew what the owner was like and I knew he wasn't going to pay for the dog to stay at the vet and yes he said put it down, I tried to get the dog but he appeared to think I had an ulterior motive. I made a special trip into town so I could be with the dog as she was being euthed as I'm walking out the car bawling my eyes out the older vet who knew me was walking out with me saying how sorry he was that he had been away when I originally came in and that he was unable to change the young vets mind and how he wished I had been his patient as he would have let me take the dog knowing I would have treated her and not let her suffer in any way, talk about a triple whammy, mistrust from both industries (except the older vet) and the only real loser in the whole scenario a dead dog that didn't need to be. I'd had better days. I also have known lovely owners who I really liked it takes all kinds to make a world. ETA I was actually surprised at what the young vet told me as there was very little swelling and the dog wasn't lethargic at all, but I'm not a vet. My old boy had osteomyelitis in one of his toes (he tore the nail slightly at the base, bacteria got into the base of the nail, spread up into the bone) and he showed no signs of any discomfort, either. The only reason I noticed was he had some lick staining on one particular toe. Initial course of broad spectrum ABs did nothing. Second course of much stronger ABs seemed to start working but then stopped. We made the choice to amputate that section of toe before the infection got any further. We were very lucky in that not only was the infection just in the toe, but in the very last bone of the toe, which meant we had time to try other things and when it did have to come off, it was a quick, cheap and easy surgery that he recovered from really well. Osteomyelitis in a leg bone could be a whole other issue though and could require complete removal of that leg so I can understand the younger vet's reasoning. If the owner was a tightarse, the prospect of a heap of money spent to end up with a three-legged dog.. I doubt they would've been keen on that. Also, if the owner refuses to sign over the dog, the young vet was (unfortunately) right to refuse to give the dog to you. She would have been breaking the law to do so. It's sad that the dog ended up dead just because the owner was too selfish/stupid to just let her go to someone else but then, I've heard of perfectly healthy greys being destroyed because the owner doesn't want someone else to make money off a dog that they failed with. I think it's maybe less about the actual money and a bit more about the pride. Which when you think about it, is even more disgustingly selfish. She refused to send the dog home with me prior to contacting the owner. She told me that they could treat it better at the clinic. I also didn't see the x-rays She didn't even give me a chance as you were given. The older, more experienced, just as caring vet who knew me was prepared to though I did find it odd. The way things are now the owner couldn't have told me to euth the dog. I worked in a rearing kennel the dogs weren't racing As he came from Tassie (he couldn't see his dogs) and had about 6 dogs with us he probably thought that I was going to take it to race because Id noticed it was fast or something like that who knows.

It was rushed through because it is a land grab, from the rumours I've heard the developers already have their hands up for Wentworth Park saying pick me. To add insult to injury they are not from Australia. The Greens well anything for a vote. While I honestly do understand how you feel I have also been on the other side of the coin from working in the industry. I took a dog to the vet she had been bitten on the leg by her neighbour as she was trying to steal his bone. The vet who didn't know me took xrays and informed me that infection had got into the bone and she couldn't send the dog home with me she needed to stay there. I knew what the owner was like and I knew he wasn't going to pay for the dog to stay at the vet and yes he said put it down, I tried to get the dog but he appeared to think I had an ulterior motive. I made a special trip into town so I could be with the dog as she was being euthed as I'm walking out the car bawling my eyes out the older vet who knew me was walking out with me saying how sorry he was that he had been away when I originally came in and that he was unable to change the young vets mind and how he wished I had been his patient as he would have let me take the dog knowing I would have treated her and not let her suffer in any way, talk about a triple whammy, mistrust from both industries (except the older vet) and the only real loser in the whole scenario a dead dog that didn't need to be. I'd had better days. I also have known lovely owners who I really liked it takes all kinds to make a world. ETA I was actually surprised at what the young vet told me as there was very little swelling and the dog wasn't lethargic at all, but I'm not a vet.

Maybe it'll give industry participants an insight into how emotionally damaging it is to have to rescue their dogs; one after another, year in and year out, a never-ending stream of dogs, never enough space, having to turn dogs away knowing they'd die, being emotionally blackmailed by trainers, having to hold dogs as they die because they can't be rehomed but their owners won't take them back. And that's on top of the abuse copped from industry participants- being called a do-gooder, being told that our rescued dogs would have been happier dead (seriously) and all the while, being treated as a free dog disposal service. Maybe Lifeline could talk to some of the burnt-out and broken rescuers who gave up their lives/money/family just for the love of the dogs, if they want to hear about people contemplating suicide or having breakdowns I really do feel for you Maddy, I have walked your talk also which is why I am an advocate for the industry to continue with strict reforms put in place. In 11 mths time I don't want to feel those feelings of helplessness, sorrow for the many dogs that will die. I just don't want it,it's bad enough as it is. To be honest, I don't understand people that think an avalanche of dogs that will die, because the industry comes to a screeching halt is better than a trickle being able to be rescued, due to the slow death because it may not be sustainable as has happened in America. Call me thick but I just don't get it.

Couldn't agree with you more but unfortunately there is an element in the industry that needs to be forced into that. People can adjust their business practise the way things are at the moment most business' are having to do that nobody has the money to spend they used to have. Bit OT aren't Burmese great cats, they are my favourite too with the exception of my moggy I have now.

Oops double post