Jed

mlc Hasn't that been done? I recently read somewhere that the results of a study identified definitive age for following pointing cues if so, why is it being replicated? mlc Eurodog. Interesting that the results should show that, yet the public snaps up every Cavallier, Cocker, Poodle, Pomeranian, Bichon and other hairy dogs, as well as hairy oodles in hundreds of thousands. Very few puppy farms breed medium short haired dogs because there is not as much market for them as long haired dogs. It is well known in pet shops that fluffy puppys (any sort) sell better than anyrhing else, and at a higher profit margin.

Ooogh, look a mop with eyes and legs!! A bit of detergent, a bucket, there's your self driven mop!! sorry, PF. I couldn't help it I saw a video of a show in US - a couple of corded poodles were competing!!

Stupid thoughtless cow. Might have been better if she had bought from a breeder - but probably after assessment a decent breeder woudn't have sold her a pup at all. Some pet shops DON'T sell pups over christmas. For the very reason they gave - people don't think, buy the pup and it either is returned to the store or dumped. Some people who own pet shops do care. And no doubt they would have to be in the shop on public holidays to feed birds, fish, rodents etc so feeding pups wouldn't be a problem.

Great book. Huge changes in the boxer, but it was a very "young" breed then. I'll take the ones we have today, thanks. No Cavaliers, only King Charles Spaniels - "Toy Spaniels"

lilli And those behavioural characteristics are what makes a breed satisfactory to a particular owner, without being used for "traditional purposes". I intensely dislike dogs which show fear of fireworks and storms. That makes the Cocker Spaniel an ideal choice -they were bred to stand for the guns, they were bred with long ear leathers to muffle the sound of guns beside them. Genetically, they are programmed not to react to loud bangs - guns, storms, fireworks. The termperament of a dog is defined as the sum of all its inherited and acquired physical and psychologicl traits, characeterists and abilities, wich determine shape and regulate the dogs responses to its environment (Seiferle, 1972) The fact that environment, a variable difficult to control and standardize, is part of its definintion makes the experimental investigation of temperament differences between breeds extremely difficult, since such experiments must bebased on the objective temperament evaluation. (Stur, 2000) Comparison of DNA sequences among members of different dog breeds revealed that there are high levels of genetic variability within breeds. The founding stock of our modern dog breeds was likely drawn from a large and genetically diverse pool of dogs (Dennis-Bryan and Clutton-Brock 1988). Many our our modern dog breeds were created by cross-breeding. Second dog breeds were actually not as ightly inbred during development of our modern breeds as it was assume. Although the goal of high phenotypic uniformity within a breed led to closed gene pools at some point during the development of modern breeds, dog breeders occasionally outcrossed their purebred dogs to avoid negative effects of inbreeding on health and behaviour (Ubbin et al 1992) (Dr Cornelia Wagner DVM, MS)

kingsfolly I dismiss the ones I noted earlier in this post because their "research" speaks for them. They are the only ones I have dismissed. I have a lot of respect for genuine studies which produce quantifiable results. The published papers I referred to earlier are written by people demonstrably unfamiliar, (by their own published work) with breed standards, dogs shows etc, and the reasons for them. Conversely, they may be well aware of those things, but choose to ignore them. Either scenario is unsatisfactory. And I will continue to dismiss academics with an agenda. Pauline Bennrtt, despite, as far as I am aware, being a breeder, has proved, both in her published work and her lectures, that she comes within that category. I have not quoted your research at any time - because I have not seen or read any of it. As far as I am aware, you have not published, so there is nothing for me to comment on. Elfin has asked a question a few times. Is there an answer?

Agree with Cowanbree's statement about breeding, if you want to do it, are prepared to do the hard yards, why not? If you haven't spoken to the breeder, at least try, unless there is some problem you are aware of. Sometimes, breeders who seem uncommunicative or difficult at the time prove to be an invaluable asset later. But you have dealt with the breeder, so you will know :D Shows are ok. You are getting one person's opinion on the day. You probably need to do 10 shows to have an overall idea. Bad handling or presentation can mar a world beating dog. I would be inclined to ask for and llisten to critiques from other breeders and owners. Breeders and show people will only be interested in any pups you produce if they are stunning examples of the breed, or if they offer an outstanding bloodline. It's not a large market either. However, I would think the pet market would be interested in any pups you are not keeping. So, you need to assess the market for your breed in your area. Ask the club, ask breeders, and check ads in your area. Phone the advertisers, ask whether the pups are sold. Tell the truth, most advertisers will be happy to tell you. You can sell to southern Qld, and other states, you simply have to be prepared to fly the pups to whereever. I would spend 12 months occasionally checking the ads on DOL to see how many pups are offered. Do the research.

Kismet Kat Quite few should, as they are Doctors of Philosophy Sandgrubber Exactly. It may also be that the "Australian Pedigree Dog owner community" has a different understanding of "science education" in this specific instance from yours? Could be too, that "sold down the river" is a useful phrase in the context. Could be that no one wants to take the chance. I can see a whole lot of issues following the results of this study, and from where I am sitting, few of them are advantageous to purebred dogs. The BEST scenario I envisage is all registered breeders having to take their breeding stock to an approved place for (a) temperament testing or (b) checking for the "insert batteries here" gene. That will involve breeders (read ME) probably having to travel 2 hours there and back, paying $$?? for the testing, filling out forms for hours and returning them with the prescribed fee of $$?? to have my dogs placed on some approved list. And I would expect my dogs to pass, as they do have "insert batteries here" temperament. All this work and effort to prove something I knew already. And I did know it already. Nothing stays in my breeding program unless it has the correct temperament. What will happen to breeds who do not have "insert batteries here" temperament? And there are lots of them around. They will fail the test. And then what? Eurodog. I'm over academics who haven't read the breed standards, don't understand breeds, haven't been to a show, or understand what goes on, can only read pedigrees in terms of COI, know nothing about the practicalities of breeding, yet believe they can mprove "welfare" without a holistic understanding of the process. I'm over being expected to justify myself because of a totally skewed documentary in another country, I'm over having to pay out huge bucks to prove things I knew already, and I'm totally and absolutely over academics wanting to elevate themselves on the backs of dog breeders without giving anything back, I'm over reading "scientific" papers which contain some truths, and a whole lot of bullspit which is accepted as gospel by those who know no better. I'm over the abnormal minority being presented as the norm. I am over expectation that there will never be any faults, and the expectation that faults can be rectified in a nanosecond, and I am over the projected impression that breeders have no idea what they are doing and don't care. I'm over stats, stats and more lies. lilli Whew, that's a bit high!! FOUR!! Phwatt

lilli (I know you didn't say it) I thought we were already doing that? To suit diverse roles in modern society? You can supply me with someone to guard my property and livestock, and I can supply you with a kissy, easy to manage, easy to groom little friend? No matter what our needs are, in modern society, there's a dog to fit. These studies seem to turn up a different answer. Perhaps it is because we are not producing Eurodog? Which is the final step in dog extinction. Trying to prove the world is round, seems pointless to me. Except --- ah remember Ingrid (just going to take my paranoia pills) I do understand the need to prove a given, But I don't think this one can be proved with any accuracy. Except to foster Eurodog. S&S I thought about your comment re the study and BSL. I did say before that there had been lots of studies, and good studies using proven figures from around the world, from various universities, proving how pointless BSL was. Large sample size, blah blah. Been presented to the governments. Nuh, they are not listening. And before someone says something unkind about the presentation by illiterates with tats - presentation was by academics, and sensible people without any links to pitbulls.Answer was still "nuh". I don't think studies will overcome BSL, and I don't think this is the purpose of this study anyhow. What we have done to try to overcome BSL has had some results. Just continue on, I guess.

lilli I And that's exactly the problem with some research. You read the papers, and they make some sense - until you apply some common sense, and your dog knowledge, and then you shake your head in disbelief. I have come to the conclusion - with you apparently - that they begin with a result and make the study fit the results. And then they can hit the headlines. Bit like newspaper reporting - I heard someone from the AMA recently say that 4 out of 10 lung cancers were caused by smoking. He was pushing for additional tax on cigarettes by the way. So, maybe we should begin smoking. 40% of smokers contract lung cancer. 60% of non smokers contract lung cancer. When I hear something like this, I want to know why the 60% of people who don't smoke have lung cancer But, shouldn't the headlines say "Take up smoking, reduce your chances of lung cancer"? And I also agree that this study wont prove much, but it will probaly look good on the front page of the HS, which is the paper which brought us all the good news about the vicious pitbulls with the 2000 lb jaw pressure and enthused the government to enact bans.

I did use it for a while. No problems. However, it was believed that it might cause reproduction issues, so I stopped using it. I cannot remember what they were, but I know at the time, I considered it valid, and stopped using it. I don't think I had any repro issues, but who knows? Terribly difficult to know exactly what was the cause whem something goes wrong. I am actually considering using it again. Price and ease of use are big plusses.

S&S I answered your remark about studies changing the attitudes of government towards BSL earlier in the thread. So I thought you hadn't read it. But if you want to believe it will, your choice. I have no issue with that. Proof that this student is anti BSL? And no one's going to beat you up if you want to use your dog in the study. I don't think there will be any problem getting the 200 dogs anyhow,

Hmm, maybe you should read all the thread before replying?

I am sure that Qld legislation says that pups cannot be sold until 8 weeks. And that applies to all resellers. ARSPCA as usual, couldn't be arsed to do it. Usual story. Too busy, not enough inspectors. Pet shops sell pups younger than 8 weeks because the public seems to like them cute and small. Also, there is a "window" for them to grow. If they go into the pet shop at 8 weeks, and don't sell for 3 weeks, they are not so attractive (rule of thumb, depends on breed a bit). If they go into the shop at 6 weeks, they will probably sell one at 6 weeks, and the remainder at 7 or 8, before they are getting gangly and unattractive. Additionally, there are bogans who rock up to the pet shops with 5 or 6 week old pups "gotta get rid of these NOW" so the shops take them. And Pets Purgatory likes them about 6 weeks, see 3rd paragraph. I think is is franchise policy. In those 2 weeks between 6 and 8 weeks, the difference in pups' boldness, social ability and skill levels is just amazing. We are speaking of 1/4 of their lives. 2 weeks may not seem lilke much, but when you realise it is 1/4 of their lives, you begin to perceive how important it is. In that last 2 weeks, they also learn bite inhibition, which is really important. An astounding number of people come here and ask what they can do to stop their puppy biting ... and 90% of the time, the pup came to live with them at 6 or 7 weeks, so the siblings or mother didn't teach it bite inhibition - so it is left to the humans, which is much harder all round. There are fewer problems with bite inhibition with pups from 8 weeks and older. Once, years ago, it was acceptable to sell pups at 6 weeks, but further research has shown the pups are better for a whole lot of reasons to go at + 8 weeks. I sell mine at 9, 10, 11 weeks, depending on how they develop and grow, which differs from breed to breed, and litter to litter. And feedback from my buyers tells me that this is the most satisfactory age. Pups are easier to housetrain, integrate into their new home more readily, and cry less at night. Being very well socialised before they leave, and being raised in the house helps, but they all do thrive and prosper. More so than pups I sent off at 6 weeks in earlier times. Just continue to phone the ARSPCA, the squeaky wheel gets the oil. To be fair, they probably know the pet shop will have a story, and they are wasting their time. However, it is the law, and you perhaps could write a letter to the manager, pointing that out. Public relations is important for retail outlets. Thanks for caring.

There is no study conducted by people with an agenda which would be acceptable. Particularly those associated with others who believe F1 hybrids are superior, and labradoodles are superior to purebred dogs. Particularly academics who sprouted that "purebred dogs are inbred", was given proof that purebred dogs are not inbred, but has yet to retract that statement, because retracting it does not align with the agenda. Proof is in the working dog study. And there already is a proven study on temperament. It is called PUREBRED DOGS. It's been proven for years and years. Better than 90% of registered purebred dogs behave exactly as their standard for temperament dictates. And the temperament of most breeds is written into that standard, so people only have to read it to know what they are getting. Or they can ask others with the breed. Unlike F1 hybrids, or crossbreds, or doodleoodles, every owner of every purebred dog will experience the same temperament with 90% accuracy. The difference will be in the nurturing. And it is tested in the conformation ring every time a dog is shown, by a properly credentialled and tested judge. If the dog does not show the temperament as per the breed standard, he is out. And really, who cares? People purchase from pet shops, or via the internet with no idea of the temperament they are getting. And this study wont make any difference to that.

HAPPY NEW YEAR TO ALL THOSE IN THE CORNER Oi, Troy, where's the Happy New Year!! icon ?? Get with it baby, Xmas has been and gone, Santa's back at the North Pole having a few nips and bedding down the reindeer!!(mods are Gods Troy, mods are Gods) *unfolds paper hat, puts it on, runs around lounge puffing on fold out paper whistle and wildly waving streamer. Dogs bark frenziedly and run around in circles, proving that no temperament test has yet been invented that could qualify them*

BisartDobes Ahem, don't forget the boxer, a companion guard dog. Used much more as a guard overseas than here. Here we tend to emphasize the "companion" bit, and forget that we have a very handy guard lying upside down on the couch snoring with his tongue lolling. And mine are doing just fine at both. They are happy to show you companionship during the day if you come nicely to the front gate. If you want to see guard, please come to the back fence at night. And yes, I believe they do fulfill their original function. People are not at all frightened of them, when they are in happy mode, but I've noticed that when the "guard" bit is on show, people show them a great deal of respect - as they deserve. My teenager lay under a tree for a couple of hours, watching 3 workmen and 3 men from the government wandering around - with my permission. She didn't say a word. But she kept her eye on them. So, they assumed they could come in the gate, and knock on the door. That was fine with me, but she had other ideas, and so did they, once she put her front feet up on the gate, eyeballed them, and drove them back with very serious barks. One remarked how friendly he had thought she was. She was friendly because I was inside the gate, talking to them in a friendly way. Once I went away, she was on guard. Once I went out, and invited them in, and was friendly, she went back to "companion" mode. Most of mine have only been asked to do as this girl did. A couple have been asked to step up to the plate - and they did it as if they had been doing it every single day of their lives. No matter where I've been, or what I've been doing, I've always felt confident about the dogs' ability to do whatever is necessary. One of my cockers indicates that she would work all day. She has drive, and bird sense. The other - well - something went wrong there. She's a sweet heart, but gun dog?? Oh dear. I guess we can't all be stars.

Natural matings, all prog testing is done by the dog. If he can't tell me when they are ready, he's a dud!! Every dog I've ever had would say " oi, this is IT" No xrays, no scans. The bitch is either pregnant or not. If not, it's too late. Nothing I can do about it. Save the money for later. By the time they are 5 - 6 weeks, you know whether they are pregnant or not. I can usually have a good guess as to how many, and that does me. I've had x rays done which haven't told me how many, and I only want to know in case the last one isn't delivered, but I can usually feel if there's one left anyhow. Natural whelping. Caesarian if necessary. I think we do more caesarians for malpresentations now because we, and vets are not as good as they used to be in delivering stuck pups. Sometimes nothing else will do. I haven't had iinertia for years - only when it was a big litter and the little mummy was tired. And usually a little rest, a bit of glucodin, a nice drink, some calcium, and a big rum for me sees it all work out. If not, off to the vet. I'm sorry I said that, will probably have inertia every time one whelps now!! If the bitch is a poor mother or very stressed or whatever, or looks like sitting on the pups - in fact, if it looks as if I need to stay, whatever the reason - I do. I had one lie on two pups right in front of my eyes!! She sat up, and dropped her brisket on them. There was nothing I could have done. I grabbed one from underneath her, and got it going, and it was ok. So, I guess, minimun interference. Unless there is some danger.

Geez, that's not enough to keep condition on you. 10 flies is a bit of a snack, but for a real protein lift, you need about 20!! Doesn't have to be all at once, no need to be greedy!!

Probably not, the government is already aware, and has been for years, of other, more relevant studies which prove that banning breeds to reduce dog bites is flawed. There are numerous proved studies from America, Spain etc which prove the point better than this study will. Pitbull bans have nothing to do with dog bites. If they did have, dog bite stats would have fallen, not risen. mlc, I don't think anyone has any problems or objections to the method in which the dogs are tested. It is what will happen to those results, and what they will be used for which concerns us. And there is a vast difference between paranoia and informed opinion. Unfortunately, those who wont do the research to form an opinion are inclined to label those who have as "paranoid". Kismet Kat, it is your right to encourage people to take park in the survey - and it is Erny's right to put her point of view. And mine. And I believe when you came to this forum, you approved of BSL. Discovering facts changed your mind. We will continue to disseminate the truth through this forum. You don\t have to believe it, or like it, but it will happen. I have lost count of the times I was called paranoid and beaten up - over years - for discouraging people from vaccinating dogs annually with C5 or C7, to avoid lymphoma, or vaccinosis of some kind. The protocol I advocated years ago is now accepted by the AVA and used by Australian vets. And prior to the changed protocol by the AVA, many members of this forum were recommending fewer vaccinations. I don't mind being beaten up or being called paranoid, if I can assist dogs to a better and healthier life. We don't pull this information from dark places, we research and learn, and present it to others for their information, education and consideration. What they do with it is up to them. Erny, please come and stand with me in the "paranoid" corner. We are in very very good company

So sorry, kimzy. Sounds to me as if they have bad people skills, which does not always equate with bad work practices. I am sure you will get your little girl back. Certainly tell your vet that you were unhappy, and if you like, send a pm to Troy and ask if it is ok to name the company. And when they go, they know you are with them, and they love you, but they are seeing the verdant fields around the Rainbow Bridge, and the wonders there. And although you cannot see them, they can see you. They wait for you at the Rainbow Bridge. The body is not important to them any longer. She will wait there for you, because time passes in an instant there, she will be happy and comfortable with friends to play with. She will miss being with you, but she knows you loved her for all her long life. My dog Nancy kept a diary, and I put it here. This is her account of going to the Rainbow Bridge. I hope it will give you peace and comfort. Know this is how Princess' passing was. I think we could all light a candle for Princess tonight, couldn't we? I've lit mine. A nice pink one, for love.

Oi, watch your mouth Bilbo Baggins!! Nothing wrong with fly paper!! I have some hanging over where the dogs sleep. I love those fly traps too, but so do the dogs, If they fall down, the dogs fall on them, to lick up the contents. Now, that's REAL EEEEEWWWW stuff, leaves maggots in the shade. Erny, do you know what Mandela's problem is? Erny living in the wild wild west, where the men are men and the sheep are nervous is extremely good for phobias. I lost most of mine, being crawled on all night by myriads of insects, beetles and wriggling things, watching humongous angry snakes having little parties on the lawn, the flyblown carcasses of animals all over the place not to mention big hairy spiders running everywhere, mice plagues when 50 jumped out of every drawer you opened, 100 hung upside down on the curtains, sand goannas ran through the kitchen, you ate a few flies every time you went outside, and the flying phase of the white ants meant you had to keep taking your clothes off to shake them out because 5000 of the buggers sticking to you drove you mad. Pshwar, what's a few maggots? I used to care, but after that, nothing seemed important!

Here's one. I have bolded the interesting text. Dr Bennett said people should worry less about a dog's breed and more about their overall behaviour background to decide if one is right for them. "We think that's what we should be breeding, those character traits, as opposed to specific dog breeds." "If we can test the parents, it could lead to a certificate of temperament that will show this dog has been friendly, safe with kids and easy to manage. Firstly you quote from the bloody Herald Sun Hardly a font of accurate and in-depth reportage. Who knows what context they pulled the quotes from. And it's interesting that the last few posts from you and others in this thread have been about NOT breeding from 'whacko' dogs. Which, I think is what the quotes are actually on about, i.e. even if a dog is perfect physically, if it has a poor temperament it should not be bred from. Also it is quite right that pet owners should be less concerned about what a dog looks like and more about how it fits in with their family. People getting the 'wrong' dog for them is why so many end up in shelters. You have to keep in mind that this is all about your average Joe Blow who wants a dog, not keen enthusiasts like DOLers. What is written in the "bloody" Herald Sun agrees exactly with the verbalisations of Dr Bennett at various seminars. For obvious reasons, I can't quote that. It's not an indepth report, but the message is there. And the fact that Dr Bennett is aligned with Dr. McGreevey who has published papers lauding the "predictability" and superiority of F1 hybrids and labradoodles over purebred dogs should be sufficient information as to her intentions. It's too simple, KismetKat. You use a student to do a study on something which is a known anyhow, and you publish the results so that Dr McGreevey, Dr. Bennett et al have a further springboard to launch their flawed plans. Everyone here believes newspaper reports over anything else, so it seems pretty valid to me to use the quote. You wanted proof, you got it, don't bitch. I'm not going looking for published papers. It's ok to defend your friends, but it's not ok to stop people learning the intent of this "study". And I wouldn't give my dogs DNA for some unnamed and unknown future study in a lifetime unless I knew exactly what it was to be used for.

KismetKat Here's one. I have bolded the interesting text. Link is at the bottom of the page. http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/forget-ab...o-1225803470155 If Dr Bennet does breed Australian Shepherds, she seems to have very badly missed the point of pure breeding, which is predictability. If she fails to understand that dog breeds = "character traits", she has missed the bus altogether. And this (above) is part of Dr McGeevey's 39 point plan, I believe, to "temperament" test all pedigree (not puppy farm, they can't find them, pedigree) dogs before breeding. Now, ask yourself why they would want to put a small number of registered breeders to the trouble (and expense probably, nothing is free) of having the parents of just 69,000 pups produced annually tested, when the parents of approximately 400,000+ will not be tested?

Sandgrubber You may think my post was judgmental, and maybe it was, but breeders need to observe and use some common sense about these things. You will never find out anything by looking at the poodle himself. You need to investigate the parents. And my guess one of them is a nasty little b#####d too! Other explanation is a screw loose. Quite possible. That's a fairly major temperament trait, some of the less problematic ones fascinate me, and I have a bit of fun seeing if I can breed them in or out. Not that that proves anything, but it is an indicator, and if you breed it in or out enough times, it's probably genetic. I know a very good breeder with a very good line who produced ONE terrified dog. You couldn't catch him or do anything with him. He wasn't nasty, just frightened. Maybe he was oxygen starved at birth or maybe he fell on his head at 2 hours. The odd one is. True cocker rage has always been believed to be a brain defect, and once the cocker club in the UK did a search to find which dogs had it, they were able to steer breeders away from those lines, which is why we rarely see true cocker rage these days. I'm actually very interested in the transmission of temperament. I like to pooch around and see the rellies, you find out a lot by doing that. A rescuer here had a boxer in rescue, nasty thing, was pts. Not typical boxer temp, so I went searching, and found out some interesting things. Difficult in a boarding kennel to find the parents of a 10 year old dog. I sometimes do a study of the pedigrees, and that is often illuminating, but you need to know the breeding first.