Jed

BindiBoo, don't beat yourself up - get her thoroughly vet checked, and be pleased you have her, otherwise, she would have been sold to Hawaii, and onshipped to a pet shop in Asia, and dog knows what would have happened to her then. I bought my first Cavaler, as a pet, from a very very good breeder - quite by accident. When I wanted a second, a black and tan, there wasn't one to be had anywhere. I was told of a breeder not far from me, registered, I phoned her, she had one Went and had a look, place looked good, pups looked good. I put a deposit on the pup at 4 weeks, collected her at 8 weeks, with all paperwork. Not many tests were done then (13 years ago). I then discovered that the breeder was a bit of a byb, and had had a few holidays from her CCCQ membership for selling to pet shops, and doing a few naughty things. Oh uh!! Wish someone had told me BEFORE I bought the pup. As I learned more, I discovered that the pup had pretty ordinary breeding too, and wasn't just the best cavalier around. She died earlier this year, at 12 1/2, from a stroke. Her heart was as clear as a bell. She never had a day's illness in her life, and was just a great dog with a wonderful temperament and personality. I did breed with her. I have a daughter, two grand-daughters, and two great-granddaughters - all tested clear for everything, all as healthy as, and the g/granddaughters are very well conformed, and healthy Cavaliers. So - don't despair!! I wish you as much good fortune as I had with my Poppy dog!! And I suspect that her breeder's membership of DogsNSW might be about to be terminated, or suspended.

I would like to see everyone who wants to buy a purebred pup join their state CC. They can then read the export lists for themselves and know who not to contact. Those "bulk" breeders generally do not have good quality. If they don't want to join, borrow a journal off someone who is a member. If someone approaches me and asks about someone I think is shonky, I can only recommend someone else, not criticise the person they asked about. BigDaz I have a return/refund policy. If the dog develops a hereditary or genetic problem, I am happy to refund/replace and/or take the pup back. If your dog was diagnosed with a hereditary problem, and I was quite sure it wasn't your fault, and you contacted me as soon as you discovered the problem, we could talk. If the pup needed expensive treatment, you could send it back if you liked. If not, I would still refund the purchase price or give you another dog. If you didn't want the new dog just then, you could have it later. And you could keep your current dog if you wished. My rationale is that if I had known the pup had a problem before I sold it, I wouldn't have sold it. I would have kept it, given it away, or put it down, depending on what the problem was, in consultation with my vet. So I would never have sold it to you. So it seems fair to me that you should have a refund for a dog I would never have sold. Unfortunately, people do break their dogs, and expect the breeder to cough up. Also, SOME vets tend to see big dogs, and diagnose HD and little dogs, and diagnose LP, whether the dog has it or not, so I want you to talk to me BEFORE you do anything, and I might want my vet or another vet to see it first. Last year, I had 2 Cav owners of young cavs tell me their vet had recommended horrendously expensive LP operarations on their Cavs. I am quite sure that none of my pups have LP. The first was was about 10 months when a lot of cavs go bum high and "walk funny" - there was nothing wrong with him, and when he was 12 months old, he was back to normal. Vets see them "walking funny" and diagnose LP without an xray, because they either don't know, or are short a payment on a beamer. The second one had a slight pelvis problem which was cured by a $40 chiropractic visit. So, I want to be your first port of call, I want you to do what I ask, not because I am avoiding the problem, but because I can maybe recommend treatment. I know my lines better than you, and better than your vet. And your vet just might be a rip of merchant. I love vets, but some of them are wrong sometimes, and sometimes they recommend unnecessary things to people who want to do the right thing by the dog, but are easily misled, and don't have a lot of knowledge. And sometimes, if the dog has something which is not hereditary or genetic, I'll give you another pup anyhow, just coz. Providing you tell me about it when it happens. I had a dog which developed mega osoephagus (sp?) which can be hereditary or not. Developed it at 16 months, his vet said it wasn't hereditary. Neither was the aortic aneursym, which is a foetal development problem, not hereditary at all. Wasn't my fault. But it wasn't the devastated owners' faults either. And, if I had a crystal ball which told me that would happen to those 2 dogs, I would never have sold them, so I figured I could stand them for another pup. And I did. Don't phone me after you've put the dog down, and try to hit me up for a few thousand. I'll see you in court!! And you'll have to sign an agreement pre purchase agreeing that you may not rehome or euth (unless at a vet's recommendation because of fatal injuries or illness) without telling me, and giving me the option of taking it back. And if it is a fatal illness or injury, I hope you will tell me when it happens, so I can support and advise you. And don't buy the pup, buy the dog. The pounds have a few cocker spaniels, because people think they are cute little "teddy bears", oh so cute and cuddly. They aren't. They are a working dog. A good city dog, and a great companion and pet, but not a toy. A pup is only a pup for a short time, so buy the dog. You'll have the pup for months, the dog for years. It's the dog you will have to live with for 10 -12 years. If you aren't sure which breed, phone up breeders. Go to the dog park. Find 3 of the breeds you fancy. Ask the people who own them what they think of them. How are they to train? How are they with the kids? How are they for the other things you want? And then come and see me, and tell me why you want the breed, convince me!! Oh and don't ask me if I've heart tested the pup. Find out what tests are relevant for the breed, find out that the PARENTS need to be heart clear, the pup can't be tested. Don't ask me about the 60 things my breed might have, that you read on a USA website, coz then I'll know you haven't really researched the breed. Ask me about the three or four real problems in the breed. And if you don't understand what "clear by parentage" means, ask me. Breeders who do 50 tests are not always the best ones either. Some think the more tests they do, the more the "pet owning public" will be impressed, and sometimes, they are not really aware of the relevance of the tests. Souff Jed mostly agrees with Souff, but not on this one. Licensing will bring further costs, further intrusive inspections, further hassels. Puppy farms will happily cough up $500 or $1000, it wont matter. They will have their 20 best dogs on view for licensing, but not the other 200. "Good" breeders wont want the hassle. I already pay about $700 pa for the pleasure of having the dogs, in council and CCCQ fees. That's a lot for me. If I obtain a breeding permit from my council, I am looking at another $1000. I don't make enough out of the dogs to even consider paying that, so I'll stop breeding if I am forced to pay another "tax" for an inspection. In Q, DPI licensed kennels are registered and inspected. I don't believe this is the way to go for "proper" breeders. Yep, I'd like to see something brought in, but I can't think of anything which will work, which will disadvantage puppy farms and advantage good breeders - EXCEPT - microchipping ALL pups with the breeders contact details as a secondary contact, and if the dog fetches up in the pound, asking the breeder to take it back if the owner wont, or can't be contacted. No release fee to the breeder (it's not his fault the dog is there), but he must take it back within 2 days, or pay to have it homed. Once some of the big puppy farms had to take back 100 or so, they would think more carefully about how they homed t heir pups. I've been suggesting this for about 6 years now, and I notice that more people agree with me now than did in the beginning, so I have hopes that one day it will be implemented.

How cute, congratulations, Bindi.

That's horrible, KJ, I do feel for you and the pup. Such a sad thing to happen Adult dogs I've heard of with neospora contracted it from beef. I think the dog on here, from human grade beef, not offal or aborted foetal material. I would not, now, feed any meat to dogs unless it had been frozen and thawed. It's unusual, certainly, but there is sufficient evidence to suggest that meat should be frozen to be quite safe. Found the thread - there are links to more information there. And I notice the recommendation is to cook the food!! No idea why I thought it should be frozen, must have got that somewhere else? http://www.dolforums.com.au/index.php?show...amp;hl=neospora

One of the members of DOL had a dog die from Neospora. If you search neospora, Bommy and boxer, you may well get the thread up again. Always freeze meat.

Signed. How disgusting.

Where? Honest question, because I've looked, and I haven't yet found it. Give me a few days, and I'll dig it up for you. Catherine O'Driscoll? Bob Rogers? Dunno, forgotten. I got interested in this some years ago (10 - 12??) - a friend who is a vet nearly lost her 7 year old staffy to parvo, when she bought hooe a pup which was incubating parvo. Saffy had been anually vaccinated. Had a really good discussion with another vet who had some theories why some vac pups got parvo and some not, and he wondered whether the annual vaccinations "cancelled" each other out. I was then interested to find out if that was the case, because my dogs only had 3 vacs and we had a few pups visit with parvo (not mine) and none of mine caught anything. But it WAS a staffy, and they are more prone. I always remembered that discussion, and years later, I found out a lot more about it. And it's stuck with me. I'll find it for you, it's probably in my favourites, but there are a lot of them. And it would have references, because I tend not to believe everything I read on the web, old cynic I am!! But it was years ago I read it too, so I've forgotten the salient details. It might even be on here somewhere, with references, so I'll check there too.

Kelly Louise Allergies and Cushings are two problems which may be related to over-vaccinating. Problem is that there is no evidence but a lot of suspicion!! An 11 year old dog doesn't really need vaccinating anyhow. Maybe do the research before you have Sasha revaccinated. A week or two wont make a difference, but proper qualified research which has led to vets world wide changing the protocol, says annual vaccination is not necessary. I'd check the facts first. The Australian Veterinary Association changed the protocol within the past 12 months, and her vac card would have been filled out before the change in protocol. She really doesn't need a vac this year, Kelly Louise, either C3 or C7. There is some evidence out there that dogs who are vaccinated annually are more prone to contracting parvo. Maybe show your vet the information on 3 yearly vaccinations, and ask him if he intends to follow the AVA protocol? With Sasha and the car, maybe put her in every time you go for a 5 minute drive - to the shops or whatever. Or just put her in the car and take her around the block on a regular basis. Make it a happy occasion, lots of happy noises and maybe a treat when she is in the car. Don't make a fuss of her when she is in the drive. Often getting them used to it in small doses does work, if you persevere.

Most sincere condolences - for both of them, ILDD. I feel for you. Such beautiful dogs.

That sucks. Bindi is happy over the bridge, forever young. Take care BindiBoo

I have come to the conclusion that old dogs mostly have a problem with kibble. Hardly any of them fancy it. It's as hard as a bone, fed dry, and doesn't have a good consistency when soaked - some brands are worse than others. Mince etc is good. I have used those little tins of My Dog or Dine - costs a fortune, fancy casserole stuff with gravy and veges, I don't suppose it is the best food, but all my oldies loved it. Scrambled eggs are good too - one or two eggs with a bit of milk (unless she is lactose intolerant, and I'll bet she isn't) beat them with a fork and microwave them. Add a bit of grated cheese too. Eggs are a complete meal and high in protein, and they are very good for keeping weight on. Add a few sardines and some oil to a couple of meals a week, good for bowels and coats. Lamb flaps are a hit with some, and the addition of a little liver or kidney, or heart is appreciated and seems easy for them to eat - and rich in protein. Not too often though - liver/kidney once a week, heart, once or twice. A lamb's heart a week would be enough for a Lhasa, I think. Yoghurt is good, but not a meal. Puppy Pal (the tinned stuff) was also a hit with some of them. Not ideal, but who cares? Some dogs live their whole lives on Pal, and I think the Puppy Pal is not too bad. As showdog says, Farex and milk, or rolled oats (cooked) and milk. Often, if you partly cook meat or mince (microwave again) they like it much better. Put it in a bit of water, and it will make a nice doggy stew. Add a bit of grated potato and 1/4 spoon of Vegemite to the water, and it should be very acceptable. High in salt, so not too often. Lenards used to do minced chicken carcasses with skin etc for about $1 kg if there is a Lenards shop near you. Need to be careful that bone in chicken mince does not cause constipation. Old bowels don't work as well, and I wouldn't feed bone in anything to an old dog more than once a week. If it is a stew or casserole for our dinner, without too much onion, or spices, I cook a bit more and the oldies get some of that now and again, or the gravy over their mince. One of mine like tinned spaghetti, so she had that once a week. Soft, easy to eat and digest food seems to suit them. Twice daily feeds are often better too. Hope some of this helps Who cares if it is not balanced? I don't think it does them any harm, and they might as well have what they like when they are old.

C3 is MLV for parvo, distemper and hepatitis. C7 is MLV for parvo, distemper, hepatitis, parainfluenza, bordatella, corona virus and leptospiros. Corona virus is a parvo like virus which is mostly contracted by pups, not adult dogs and it is rarely fatal. Leptospiros is a tropical disease, and I believe there have been very few cases, if any, south of Mackay. If you are in Sydney, the chances of your dog contracting lepto is about the same as those of him being elected prime minister. The annual and 3 yearly vaccine are exactly the same. The 3 year vaccine was introduced and cleverly packaged to meet the requirements of the new AVA vaccination protocol. Which protocol has been in force in North America for at least 10 years. The AVA reluctantly sanctioned the 3 year protocol because it was apparent that vet members were liable to be sued by owners whose dogs suffered from diseases caused by over vaccination. If it was my dog, I would have it vaccinated with C3 on a 3 yearly basis. But do have the dog vet checked annually. Very important. I would also consider either having a talk to the vet who recommends annual vaccinations, or changing to another vet who is more up with research. IMHO, if vets aren't up with one thing, the probably aren't up with latest protocols, or advances in other areas. Over vaccination has been proven to cause a lot of problems. You certainly don't want your dog to suffer from a disease which could be vaccinated against, but on the other hand, you don't want the vaccines to cause a problem. And there is plenty of evidence that annual vaccinations DO cause problems. Here is a link to Dr Jean Dodds recommended vaccination schedule. Dr Dodds is the leading researcher in vaccines for dogs, and vaccinosis. Remember that she is in US, where rabies is a problem, so ignore the information on rabies. http://www.weim.net/emberweims/Vaccine.html

You fail to understand the difference between a lack of understanding and disagreement and your use of Ferguson to illustrate your position would be deeply offensive to anyone who has suffered child abuse. I don't think so. I have stated my position re JH. If you can't understand that, or don't want to understand, I don't have the will or the time to try to make you understand. It is not important. And as for the crack about my breeding principles, I couldn't be bothered arguing that either, and again, your opinion isn't of any import to me. Actions speak louder than words, Sheridan, I said that earlier, and I'll repeat it. and I'm glad you don't care because I wont have to bother continuing this pointless argument.

I did not want to write this in my previous post for obvious reasons but Denis Ferguson constantly avowed publicly that he loved little children. And perhaps he does. That has never prevented him harming them I've felt is necessary to post this, Sheridan, not to draw unpleasants comparisons to Jemima Harrison, but so you will understand what I am saying, as you do not appear to comprehend other explanations I have posted.

I'm going to assume this is just you not admitting that Jemima posted she had a working flatcoat despite evidence that she did. I will also assume that despite evidence she doesn't like PETA, you won't admit that either. Whatever. As I suggested earlier, you were conspicuous by your silence at the time. Why don't you just ask her. It's not like she's not contactable. She said she had a flatcoat, or a couple, I've forgotten. I don't see that as proof she is not furthering PETA's aims. There are plenty on here, for instance, who have dogs and support PETA. Why would I ask her? She has stated publicly that she is not a PETA supporter. It doesn't matter what is said, for mine, Sheridan, it is what people do which speaks loudly to me. She is a PETA supporter. She is furthering PETA's aims. By her deeds. Words mean nothing without supporting action. It is walks like a duck .......................... And if she is not a PETA supporter, I am pleased that given normal circumstances she will live long enough to see how much her actions have aided their cause, and I sincerely hope she does. There are two things. 1. Jemima said she had working flatcoats. This is inconsistent with PETA's policy. 2. She has stated she does not support PETA. To my mind, you can accuse her all you like in this sort of snipey backhanded way or you can actually have a dialogue with her. That you don't wish to talk to her says more about you than it does about her. The words cowardice and insecurity come to mind. Sheridan That's right, but she has SHOWN that she does support PETA, Sheridan. Actions speak louder than words. I have posted my opinion of the doco on the forum. Why would I want to talk her? What would I want to talk to her about? I have no interest in her at all. Why would I have? Anything I wanted to say to her I have already said. My opinions were foreshadowed by other posters, so I didn't bother repeating what had been said. The damage is already done, and you may erroneously rabbit on that I am behaving in a "snipey backhanded" way, but that is just your opinion, and you are obviously voicing it in the hope that I will say something rash on a public forum. I assure you that I will not. You are entitled to your opinion too, and it matters little to me what it is. I am not sure how many times I must tell you that I did read what Jemima Harrison wrote, I know she has dogs. That doesn't change my opinion.

I'm going to assume this is just you not admitting that Jemima posted she had a working flatcoat despite evidence that she did. I will also assume that despite evidence she doesn't like PETA, you won't admit that either. Whatever. As I suggested earlier, you were conspicuous by your silence at the time. Why don't you just ask her. It's not like she's not contactable. She said she had a flatcoat, or a couple, I've forgotten. I don't see that as proof she is not furthering PETA's aims. There are plenty on here, for instance, who have dogs and support PETA. Why would I ask her? She has stated publicly that she is not a PETA supporter. It doesn't matter what is said, for mine, Sheridan, it is what people do which speaks loudly to me. She is a PETA supporter. She is furthering PETA's aims. By her deeds. Words mean nothing without supporting action. It is walks like a duck .......................... And if she is not a PETA supporter, I am pleased that given normal circumstances she will live long enough to see how much her actions have aided their cause, and I sincerely hope she does.

I noticed that when Jemima arrived, Jed, you were conspicuous in your silence. I kept expecting you to jump in with 'You're a member of PETA' and the rest of it. How about next time she's on you actually put that to her. I believe she'll point out that she has purebred working gundogs which pretty much disqualifies her from animal rights activism. Get your specs checked, Sheridan, and go and have another look. I noticed she didn't answer anything which didn't suit her, and I noticed she said she had flatcoats. You have said before she doesn't support PETA. I don't believe that. I didn't ask her again, I took your word that she told you she wasn't a card carrying PETA member. And as you had previously related what she said, I didn't suppose I'd get a different answer. Did you lie about that? And she couldn't be bothered answering any of the other questions she didn't want to, so, why bother? If it walks like a duck, looks like a duck, has feathers and quacks, it's a duck for me. We are what we give witness to, Sheridan. Where Jemima says she has a working flatcoat. We are indeed what we give witness to, Jed, but perhaps some of us can use the search function better than those who post, tripping over their feet in their haste to call others liars. - Jemima Harrison, 8 January 2009, LA Times. Anyone can talk the talk, it's walking the walk that counts. You are what you give witness to.

I noticed that when Jemima arrived, Jed, you were conspicuous in your silence. I kept expecting you to jump in with 'You're a member of PETA' and the rest of it. How about next time she's on you actually put that to her. I believe she'll point out that she has purebred working gundogs which pretty much disqualifies her from animal rights activism. Get your specs checked, Sheridan, and go and have another look. I noticed she didn't answer anything which didn't suit her, and I noticed she said she had flatcoats. You have said before she doesn't support PETA. I don't believe that. I didn't ask her again, I took your word that she told you she wasn't a card carrying PETA member. And as you had previously related what she said, I didn't suppose I'd get a different answer. Did you lie about that? And she couldn't be bothered answering any of the other questions she didn't want to, so, why bother? If it walks like a duck, looks like a duck, has feathers and quacks, it's a duck for me. We are what we give witness to, Sheridan.

Will see if I can find it for you, iffy, it was put on this forum a while back.

My opinion, stated in discussions here when the BBC doco first aired in Britian is that JH is a full blown PETA supporter at least, if not a card carrying member. She is certainly supporting Ingrid Newkirk's ethos and aims in a major way. I don't believe that anyone could assemble something as skewed as that doco without having a major agenda, which has nothing to do with the health of pedigree dogs. Of course she is interested in the Victorian legislation. It's allied with her aims.

The medications will really help. One of my dogs in congestive heart failure was a crash test dummy for Vetmedin when it first became available in Aus. Raw diet has been proven to help. Google Enzyme Q10, it seems to help too. Lots of positive informaaton on it. Check the holistic meds wont negate the "normal" drugs and you should be fine. Hope you get many years together. Don't vaccinate her again either.

10 years. That's it, breed them until they can breed no more, then shoot them Poor, poor old girl. Such a lovely soft breed too. They deserve better, don't they? Blind. Chances are the dog is affected by PRA. It may have ulcerated both eyes by running into a stick, but my bet is on PRA. So, some of the pups will be affected too, and go blind. These pups should have a DNA test prior to rehoming, so someone isn't landed with a dog programmed to go blind. *sigh* And we are arguing about the damage registered breeders do to purebred dogs? I do think someone should take notice of this. Puppy farm unregistered dogs, none tested for anything, and the producer uncaring whether they have any diseases or not. But, they are purebred, so the registered breeders get the blame, even though these dogs are probably 2nd or 3rd generation puppy farm bred. Fact is, there are too many homeless cats anyhow, so if they are desexed at 6 weeks, and a percentage dies, that would probably be better than going on to breed. If they are dead at 6 weeks, they can't breed.

There is lots of information against it, and a lot of it involves difference in growth etc between early desexed or not. If you google Dr. Harry Corbett, a vet in Vic, you will find he has a lot of practical things to say about it. Are you serious?? Dr Corbett is a nutter. He is against desexing ANY animal at a young age, including kittens, despite all the information out there proving how safe it is. He frequently rants in my local paper about how many kittens have died at his clinic this week because of being desexed early... Absolute rot. Sorry but have no respect for him AT ALL. The paper I am referring to was based on research conducted by numerous vets. I'll try and dig it up. I've read most of the published papers for and against Kirty. I made my decision some years ago, so I have probably already seen what you have. And there is a lot of information against early desexing. I personally think rescues should be desexed before being rehomed, but I don't believe it is the overall best option. It is just the best option for those animals at that time. The lesser of two evils. Have you met Dr. Corbett, or are you basing your opinion on what is published in the local paper? Is he a nutter because people bring their early desexed kitten to him because it is sick, and it dies? Do you not think his anecdotal evidence as a vet is at all valid? There is a lot of research into mortality rates of early desexed cats (not from Dr. Corbett) and his "rantings" seem to agree with that research, as they would, if the research is correct. blackdog Too right. Looked a bit scarey for a while, didn't it? Worried me that the CCCQ sat on it's collective hands for so long, but once it was pointed out that they would be desexed out of existence, there was a bit of action!! And I loved those surveys the DPI had available. We all filled them out. A rare win for commonsense.

There is lots of information against it, and a lot of it involves difference in growth etc between early desexed or not. If you google Dr. Harry Corbett, a vet in Vic, you will find he has a lot of practical things to say about it. My own vet, who has a masters degree in small animal surgery and medicine says the risks were greatly increased and will not do it. It has been carefully explained to me, and I have chosen not to do it.

That's how I saw it too, Steve. Go Blackdog,you have every right to defend yourself. Everybody else does. Don't bother checking with Sheridan, you couldn't post at all then