Salukifan

I'd be asking for a revisit. Did Sandra see him?

Exactly what do you think that means? It's kibble. It's a quality kibble. Some dogs do great on it and others not. But the word "holistic" means nothing. Personally I don't think it hurts to rotate dogs through a new kibble every now and again but I don't think BH is a miracle diet.

No way in God's green earth would I take on a pet dog under those conditions. There woudl be a considerable effort involved in making the dog available at short notice and exactly when required for stud duties. Save yourself a lot of angst and buy your next pup outright. It would be a different matter if you were going to venture into the show ring. And if you were providing all care, the dog should be free IMO. Mine was. FYI, I have two entire males and I don't have issues with humping or pissing.

Did folk miss this bit? It's not WOULD not rescue, it's COULD not rescue. You either have the equipment and the skills and experience to work at that sort of height or you don't. Council doesn't fund the fire brigade. I'm all for sheeting responsibility home.. but not in this case. Emergency services are funded by the state, not local councils. They weren't the bad guys here. Fire brigade would have been the first people I called.I fail to see the point in duplicating expensive equipment when one service was able to assist.

Leave it. Unless you can see pink underneath, its fine. Pads are meant to be tough.

Thanks ... but she likes giving them a bedtime snack :) ..maybe just a small ball of mince , then? How about a dog biscuit? Aldi sell some good ones.

I'd be going straight to K9Pro for an evaluation. You can't afford to take chances and frankly your liability in rehoming a dog with a bite history on a child is massive.

If they do well on Supercoat and the odd egg, I don't think the soup mix will add anything nutritional to the diet. The odd packet of marked down chicken bits, no name tuna in oil, or chicken pet mince or decent table scraps would add variety but the diet sounds OK as it is.

Dobecrazy: I've already said I dont' think its the be all and end all of prerequistes but lets see: To successfuly breed you'd have to evaluate your bitch, examine her bloodlines and make a determination on a suitable sire for the litter. In my breed that generally involves quite a bit of pedigree research and analysis of what various matings might produce. Then you'll be evaluating the result of the mating and selecting the show prospects you'll have to title. That will involve both structural and temperament assessment and if you get it wrong, you have to start over again. What you see at 8 weeks is indicative of the adult dog but no guarantee that you'll get a dog you can title. Don't you think that might give you a greater awareness of the components of the breed standard than simply "owning the breed"? Lets turn the situation around. What do you think that you'd bring to the table as a future judge if you've never shown or bred a dog? What kind of evaluations would you be performing on the relative merits of the dogs out there if you don't enter the ring? Will you ever, as most exhibitors do, watch the judging and look for the whys and wherefores of what won and what lost. Can you learn to balance the good and bad points of dogs other than your own? It is possible to become very conversant with the standard and with gait analysis and with puppy evaluation without breeding but how is what you're doing now preparing you in that regard?? You don't like "bowling ball fronts". Can you describe in canine structure terms why you don't like them and the impact that they have on the dog's form and function?

It ain't black and white - nothing is. I just think that fixing the "system" we have now has better prospects than reinventing it and dividing the Fancy.

Charming - yep you've got "future show ring judge" written all over you :laugh: If you want to be taken seriously, I suggest a major attitude adjustment, starting right now. Frankly you'll get a much better understanding of the system you're so highly critical of by making yourself part of it than by making snakey and unjustified comments about participants. You want to get involved? Prove it. Seems to be you're a bit light on in that department at the moment . 2 dog shows and you've never set foot in the ring.. yep, that's real "involvement". Seriously, put your money where your mouth is and learn how to show your dogs. Old ladies seem to manage to do it every day. :) And remember they'll be judged by the standard in this country, not that in the USA.

Given that how a dog "looks" may significantly influence its ability to work, you can't ignore that. Everything from the tip of my breed (Whippets) nose to the end of its tail is influenced by the function the dog was meant to perform and those looks matter. Once you understand that every word of the standard is informed by function, then that standard becomes the bible for the breed. What breed have you got? You're not going to see live coursing open up as a method for people to test the working ability of our sighthounds and lure coursing and flat racing don't provide an effective subsitute. I get all you're talking about at my breed's speciality shows - and more. I talk to my Whippet and other sighthound friends all the time. None of this may not be as good as coursing my dogs on hares but its the least worst method we've got within the law.

What breeds? It's hardly all of them. The ANKC is largely not responsible for many of the extremes of big and small out there. It's the profit breeders that are. I can say that with complete confidence becasue many of the huge and teacup dogs simply don't conform to ANKC breed standards. I'll concede that there's some colour breeding occuring in some breeds but I'd argue that much of that market is being met by unregistered breeders also. Of course folk know pups will vary in type - but that's why there's a breed standard to keep people on track. I can't name a single ANKC breeder I know who lets the fashion of the pet market dictate their breeding decisions. Most don't give a toss about what the public wants this month - they can sell the pups they breed without any problem whatsovever. These may be popular perceptions but they simply don't stand up to any kind of scruitiny. Maybe you need to come back into the fold to realise the situation isn't as bleak as you imagine it to be.

Pretty much everything you want is possible with the ANKC, if MEMBERS push for it. They can do so through the breed clubs or the state canine controls. The ANKC doesn't receive submissions directly. The precedent for opening breed registries for outcrossing is well established if the need to do so is demonstrated. Working gundog breeders register their dogs with the ANKC even though they don't often show them - but they do compete with them in ANKC sanctioned performance trials. You can register for ANKC performance events with a dog recognised through other registries - the ISDS and the WKC are cases in point. I have no idea where you have gotten the idea that "if you don't show you shouldn't breed" is the motto of the ANKC. It simply isn't the case. However if you don't show and all you do is breed the dogs you own and you never test them against any external set of criteria, then that's hardly in the interest of breed bloodlines either IMO.

The difficulty with breed standards is, like most written documents, that they are open to interpretation. How judges and breeder interpret the standard will always vary to some degree. They don't give anyone a cookie cutter that allows them to stamp out the "perfect" dog time after time. NO dog is perfect and if you talk to a lot of judges, it becomes a matter of balancing the positive and less positive attributes of any dog with those of other dogs to arrive at a decision. Some will favour some features over others and some will cane some faults over others. I think the "more is more" line of thinking that leads to exaggerated features and flashy but incorrect dogs will always be around but its only an issue when folk allow it to govern their entire breeding programs. From where I sit that's the minority of breeders. We all like to win but frankly I think breeders are more likely to identify judges that like their style of dogs and show under them than totally change their breeding programs to fit in with whatever is the current fashion in the ring. Most of the folk I know are strongly committed to their breeding programs and aren't going to use the big winning dogs if they don't suit their ideals or objectives. They value speciality results over Best in Shows and may get frustrated with judges but they don't toss their dogs out and buy whatever's lining up in General Specials. Most folk arent' changing breeds like their undies to show whatever's winning in the Allbreeds pointscore. One thing you can always guarantee about fashion is that it changes frequently. The thing I find a tad frustrating about so many of these "the show ring is ruining our dogs" lines of discusson is that the overwhelming majority of those arguing it aren't in the show ring trying to change anything. Dead easy to take pot shots from outside the ring ropes. Where are the paragons of breed type being produced by so many of those who don't show or work their dogs. Yes, there are some folk practicing what they preach but not many. Its only when you actually get involved that you get a feel for the commitment, frustration and disappointment that's part and parcel of dog breeding. I think its a pity that some breeds have diverged into bench and working lines but in some cases I do believe that is necessary for the future of the breed. The challenge will always be to balance form and function. But it's not the piece of cake some folk seem to think it is. Judges can only judge what's put in front of them. How about some of those who think the show ring is ruining dogs give the judges a different type to consider?

Eyeopener: You have a pretty jaded view of the ANKC. ANKC pedigrees are starting to hold health results. Some litters can't be registered unless parents have been tested and results recorded. There are plenty of ANKC breeders who think health, soundness and temperament are as important as type. And the ANKC works with and contributes funding to the development of health testing and health research in dogs. All a second registry will do is divide memberships in an already dwindling purebred dog fancy. There aren't a heap of unregistered breeders out there just itching for a new registry to start up and collect the rafts of health results they've got on their breeding dogs over the years. I'd rather "fix" the registry we have where fixing is required than start over. Of course while people aren't prepared to step up and be part of the changes then we'll get what we've always got. The ANKC ain't perfect but as I see it its the best registry we have for purebred dogs and the changes folk want aren't insurmountable. Of course you have to build the willingness to change at the breed level first. How any registry would have the resources to do regular kennel inspections is an interesting point - and they'd want to be well funded for all the legal challenges to refusal of membership/breeders prefixes.

I'm no help at all - six dogs here!! Two dogs are twice the grooming, twice the feeding, twice the vet bills and twice the poo. But I think they are twice the fun. Watching your dogs play is one of the world's greatest time wasters. However, I'd honestly suggest you wait a while if you can. Two young dogs is a lot of fun. Two very old dogs can be a lot of heartbreak. Spacing out the ages helps a lot IMO.

No way would I do this. That advice is so out of date its not funny.

Starting off your judging license bid by slamming the current status of the breed isn't what I call a winning strategy. You'd probably already have folk who've noted your comments and how many folk are going to want you to go over their dogs now as you train for your licence??? I suggest you start practicing some diplomacy. We all have opinions on the status of our breeds but you need to be careful about how and where you share them. I don't think owning two entire dogs and being able to breed them and raise litters necessarily gives you the knowledge needed to judge. But it sure gives you a perspective on how challenging it can be to breed to the standard.

Don't for a moment think that access to books and the internet is going to make training a dog easier. Give me two dog trainers and I'll give you a debate on methods. I've seen advice given on these forums that I'd describe as nothing short of disastrous and I've seen what happened when folk followed it. That doens't happen with the professionals here but its not always apparent what qualifications the advisor may or may not have. Access to increasing amounts of information can simply lead to additional confusion. My advice? Relax and don't try to complicate things unnecessarily. You're sounding a bit stressed about something that should be really enjoyable. Pups don't need "flashcards" or intensive training programs initially. Even Susan Garratt had to adjust her thinking on crate games along the way. They need to learn routines, self control, to deal with a bit of boredom and that obeying you profits them. They also need to learn to play with you and much of what you teach can be rewarded with play. What they don't need is pressure to perform before their minds and their bodies are ready for it and that's a mistake that can really ruin things.

My honest advice? WAIT. A Lab may be ideal for this family but I'd be suggesting that they wait until their youngest is about 4. Lab pups are mouthy and Lab adolescents knock toddlers around. Older kids can be better trained to behave appropriately around a pup and I think they'd all find the experience more enjoyable. Option B is a mature Lab from a known background that's been socialised with kids. There are Lab rescues around who would have suitable dogs from time to time.

I'd be suggesting you try chiro and some muscle therapy for a few months before taking this step. I'd not be relying on a non-chiropractically trained vet for this issue. Fecal incontinence can be one side effect from this op and there's no way back once its done. I'd suggest a consult with Dr Sandra Hasset (chiro trained vet) at the Animal Medical Centre at Phillip before you take the plunge.

I know someone local who had it done on their BC that kept getting abcesses. The operation didn't create any further complications. Has this dog seen a chiropractor lately? Anal gland issues can sometimes arise in conjuction with pelvis/hip issues. The dog that had its glands removed also had HD.

Invest in a crate and sleep her in it. I have the crate, just waiting for my "Crate Games" book to arrive so that I don't make any mistakes. What "mistakes"? Short of hurling her into it and slamming the door on her, its pretty hard to stuff up. I think you could safely start feeding her in it and sleeping her in it before that book arrives. Stick her bed in there and go for it.

Nope. Chances are that she can sense things you can't. No way would I be permitting this to happen. Invest in a crate and sleep her in it.