Jed

I'm sorry if i'm getting this wrong. But my point is dog do go to the vets healthy, I ever stated all the time it may only be 5-10 time in their entire lives but for a number of reasons they have to go to the vet. When a bitch is presented for health test or vaccinations which ever they are she is seen by a vet. 9 times out of 10 vets do a quick look over as part of their consolation regardless the reason she is there. For example A vet that put a dog under for hip test without a quick check needs to have their licence revoked IMO. I would not take a litter or dam into a clinic either but vets do house calls IF needed, not saying every litter needs checking. Have you never had a c-section or mastitis or retained products in any of your bitches? great if you haven't but some of these situations arise during breeding regularly, even in the best of situations in the best kennels. Puppies also have an array of little complications that sometimes occur. (Please note I am not speaking in experience just research in my progress in becoming a breeder) Have you never a dog with a stomach bug, any minor issue (like licked a toad ) or suffered any aged sickness, blindness or arthritis issue or needed medication what so ever? A statement of 100% healthy is a very bold statement. Please note I don't question your ethics or methods of breeding and selling your puppies. Just saying even the most experienced owner/exhibitor/breeder and vet can not predict and assume they know very thing about their dog inside and out 100% of the time. And Some are willing to breed a less then 100% healthy dog for whatever reason. Which is why health checks are in place, and we recommend puppy buyers see the litter, dam + sire if possible and Any health checks available. I never meant that buyers should request or demand health checks, thats crazy! just ask what is available (and yes do the research to know what is required to be available) and if they feel comfortable with the breeder then continue on their purchase otherwise move on. Of course buyers should ask for the results of health tests. I give puppy buyers a copy to take with them. I very rarely have a dog with a stomach bug. And if I take the dog to the emergency vet for toad or tick envenomation, they do not generally check the dog, they specifically check to solve or ameliorate the problem And some areas do not have travelling vets, as some areas have hopeless travelling vets. Day to day health is assessed by activity level and behaviour, colour of gums and mucous mebrananes, look of skin, appetite, droppings, frequency of urination and quantity of water drunk and general behaviour. I mentioned that after 10 years the dogs are probably going to have more vet visits, which covers what you mention about arthritis etc. Some do and some don't. I am not willing to breed a less than healthy dog. All the dogs in my breeding program are 100% healthy, otherwise they are not in it. They don't get the runs in any major way, they don't have bad skin, they don't scratch, blah blah. IMHO, every breeder should adopt the same attitude. There is no dog so winning, or so good looking that he can afford not to have premium health. And don't think I am the only breeder with this attitude. I don't want dogs I have to run down to the vet every couple of weeks, or every month, I don't want to pay the bills. I want healthy dogs who don't need the vet. Any deviations from the above, or some other signs, it is time for the vet. My job is to ensure the dogs are healthy. If all the above are good, why should the dog go to the vet? All he would do is what I have done, and maybe take the temperature and say all good. IMHO, people who cannot tell whether their dogs are healthy or not should not be breeding. Perhaps in the beginning, while they are learning they should have the vet check the dog, but it should not be needed aftewards. If the dog is genetically healthy, is wormed regularly, is treated for parasites, is fed correctly and handled correctly, there is no need for frequent vet visits. As mentioned to SSM - I am not talking about health checks - ie, heart, HP, LP etc, but visits to the GP vet as you mentioned. Some breeders do like to take their dogs for frequent checks, and that is how you tune your "eye" to know whether the dogs are healthy or not. I don't care whether others take their dogs to the vet every day. That is their business. My business is to breed healthy dogs from healthy parents. I see no reason to be continually taking them to the vet. The people to question my ethics are not the people on this forum, but my buyers, and over nearly 40 years I have had many repeat purchases. All breeders are not the same, and all breeders do not operate in the same way. And I guarantee my dogs' health when I sell them. I hope that qualifies my attitude a little more.

SSm I am quite sure you know the answer to this one. :)

Like others, I think the murmur will probably abate - and probably by the 8 week check. But it may not. The fair thing for the breeder to do is refund your deposit, and maybe leave it that you can still buy the pup if it passes the 8 week check. However, at the moment, the pup is not suitable for the purposes intended so by law, they should refund your deposit. If you go to the courhouse, you can take out a plaint against them for under $100. You can do it yourself. It will go to mediation, cost you no more, and if you keep saying you want a healthy dog, and this one was not because it had a heart murmur. I think it is very likely you would win. And receiving the plaint in the mail will often liven up the most recalcitrant!! If you threaten something --- do it!! Your case is that at the time of purchase, the dog was unsound and not suitable for the purposes intended. If you went to buy a toaster, and left a deposit, but when you went to use it, it didn't go you would want a refund of your deposit, or another toaster. Same principle. I don't know what these wretched "breeders" can be thinking. It's all about $$ maybe. and do complain to your state CC. Good luck

Sky Soaring Magpie I don't classify health tests are the same as the dog being checked by the gp vet. Ithought, as a breeder, you would know the difference between "tests" and "vet visits". Maybe not. No bitch is in my program unless she has passed her tests, and mother, father, aunts and uncles have no problems. Of course people should do the tests, my boxers were holter monitored and I suppose in future they wil be tested for ARCV - if I ever breed again, and the Cavs are tested by a cardiologist. And I have a "bit of paper". And if they ever fail, the whole lot is dismissed from the breeding program. They do not go to the gp vet for that testing, as you well know. And they do not go to the vet for checkups, because they are not unwell. If they failed the specific tests, they are out of the breeding program, if they need to go the the gp vet for illnesses, they are out of the breeding program. And I have never had the urge to conduct my own testing, thanks But like Oakway, I don't see any point in trundling them to the vet for nameless "checks". If you equate checks with health tests, you are welcome. I don't think anyone else does.

Angeluca Experienced owners/exhibitors/breeders can tell whether the bitch is healthy or not. Ditto for a dental, they know whether the dogs need a dental or not. AVA approved vacs are now 3 yearly. My dogs are healthy 100% of the time. They may become less healthy over 10 years. I would never never contemplate breeding a dog or a bitch which was not in excellent health and stayed in excellent health. If I took one of my bitches to the vet for a "checkup" he would laugh me out of the surgery. I take them if I think something is amiss, and we do tests, but that is the exception, rather than the rule. The point of breeding is NOT to use dogs which are always at the vets. And Hip and elbow scores on breeds where this is required should be done well before they are mated. And I don't do ultrasounds because they are often wrong. I can palpate the bitch and generally get the numbers of pups correct and the way they are lieing. And I need a rough idea because I need to know whether the bitch has whelped all the pups when the time comes. If I thought she was having 6, and she whelps 4, and I think I can feel 2, we are off to the vet for oxytocin, or a caesar. I'd rather keep the ultra sound $$ and use it when it might be really needed. And really, what is the point of knowing early? You can hardly squish a few more in if she is only showing one or two. I think in Vic, breeders are supposed to take the new born litter and dam to the vet for a check. I probably know as much as the vet about whether the pups and dam are healthy. There is no way I am upsetting the pups and mother, and taking them into a hostile and perhaps dangerous environment to keep some dodger from the Government happy. If I lived in Vic I would not breed. Too difficult Buyers need to be careful about what they ask for. I had someone contact me wanting a brown and white or black and white king charles cavalier. She wanted to know had the pup been tested for MVD, SM, EFD and CC. Only 4 breeders in Aus are testing for SM as far as I know, and I am not one of them. I have neve seen EFD or CC, and I hope I never shall. With 4 generations of my own breeding, I don't think I am going to see EFD or CC. I couldn't be bothered educating someone about which tests were relevant, and which aren't, nor could I be bothered educating her about colours, so I sent her to one of the breeders who MRIs for SM. They don't have any pups of course. And they might pass her along too. So buyers should do their basic research before they enquire. When I am contacted, I send back a standard email, saying what is available, stating what will happen pre-sale, what the pups have had done, and will have done , and some basic information about the pups and the parents and the price. ie - vaccinated, microchipped, registered with the CC, It is then up to the buyer contact me if they are still interested. And I don't care what they say in their first email - as long as they aren't rude. All breeders have different requirements. I don't want to read 20 pages, I would like to know where they live, whethr they own or have owned the breed before. Maybe something about the family. Problem is there are so many sites advising them what to say, that a lot of them disguise the truth because they think they wont get a pup. ie - have little kids. Some breeders wont sell to people with little kids. Buyers are better to tell the truth and find someone who will co operate with them It is quite obvious that some are retyping something they have read which sounds good. I treat all enquiries the same. Some are lookers, some are other breeders wanting to know. If they indicate they are still interested after the first email, I send photos, and keep in contact. Talking to them all the while, and by the time the pups are ready to leave, I have enough buyers. Anyway, I digress, sorry. :)

Must be psychic, FFAK, read your mind there. Where FFAK lives - and where I live - is quite bushfire safe. It is rural, but not the sort of bush which burns like mad. I don't think there ever has been a fire through here - ever Firie doing the ad about house fire awareness said you have 3 minutes to get out. Think I would agree with that.

The most likely thing is that she is not ready. My dogs fiddle about - until the girl is ready - and while you blink, there is a tie. I wouldnt worry, they don't all cycle on the 11th day. And there is Steve's test. If the vulva feels like your nose, she isn't ready. When it feels much softer, like the middle of your top lip, she is ready.

FFIK lives in an area which is very unlikely to be affected by bushfire, and I think if there was a warning, FFIK would be off with a car full of dogs. However, not a bushfire prone area. And if the house caught fire, the dogs would be safe in the yard As far as saving the dogs ... I was very fire safety conscious, I had smoke alarms, I had a torch beside the bed, I had 4 external doors. Each room had a window with an opening more than big enough to climb out of. Don't rely on dogs to run outside themselves. None of mine did. I carried each one out just in case they ran the wrong way if I called them. None of them even looked like going outside. And 5 were dead or unconscious when I woke up. They were on the floor of my bedroom. The 2 on the bed were groggy but ok. Carbon monoxide poisoning. The carbon monoxide preceeded the fire. And it all happens much faster than you could ever believe.

Has the dog had a successful mating and tie before? I would think the girl is just not ready. But it is difficult to say without seeing them.

He would be in my breeding program. Showing is an optional extra. If he doesn't like the ring, but is a nice dog, there is no question.

I thought the AVA protocol for vaccinations was changed from annually to 3 yearly a few years ago. Heartworm - I don't like the yearly vaccinations, but you can get monthly chewable, and daily from the supermarket, or the chemist. The dog should be on some sort of heartworm preventative. I don't think those vets were anti vaccine - but I am pro and probably would have missed any nuances like that

I haven't vac mine apart from 2 puppy vacs and one at 12 months+ for about 14 years.Never had a problem. This information needs to be out there, so people can make an informed choice. My vet knows I wont vac annually, but his partner sends me annual reminders *sigh*. Interesting to see what Dr Glickmann of Purdue has had to say about raw and MVD, and vaccinations and MVD - and cavaliers. He feels that the vaccines exacerbate, or cause MVD in Cavaliers - but only in genetically susceptible dogs. Which may explain my excellent run - as a breeder and owner - with MVD. A few of the dogs had murmurs after the fire. Interesting to see that they have all disappeared Dr. Glickmann's theory would explain why trying to pin a hereditary link on MVD is so difficult. I would not be at all surprised if SM is proved to be caused be something similar. So far, I have bred a Cav which developed Leukemia within 2 weeks of being given her annual booster at 3. It was a particularly aggressive form of leukemia, and she was dead within 3 days. Then there was the Cav which developed ketoneacidosis, which is a serious complication of diabetes. Trouble is, she didn't have diabetes. She developed it within a week of being vaccinated, and again, was pts in 6 days. So disheartening for a breeder, so sad for the owners, and so disasterous for the poor dog. Anyhow - enjoy!! You can also subscribe to Dogs Naturally.

Here is a link to Dogs Naturally Magazine, with Catherine O'Driscoll DVM -an American vet. She has asked vets to comment on vaccinations. Worth a read if you are interested in vaccines and vaccinosis. Oops, forgot the link!! http://www.dogsnaturallymagazine.com/vets-on-vaccines/

No, Lyss, not an idiot, just taken down by a crooked idiot.

I agree with Sheridan. Why would someone who obviously dislikes purebred dogs and has only contempt for their breeders visit a purebred forum? I cannot see any purpose, unless it is to complain about purebred dogs - which is what you have been doing. Anyone breeding dogs, no matter what sort, who does not know the correct name of the breed, and who cannot spell simple words which are common to dog breeding and ownership, is signalling to everyone else that you know nothing. And they are seeking to make money off something they know nothing about, and which they probably should not be breeding. I wouldn't ring up anyone who advertised if they had the name of the breed wrong!! Lyss, your pup contracted parvo more easily because it was not in good condition, having so many worms, and who knows what she had been fed, and because she was not vaccinated, and no doubt the mother was not vaccinated either, so there was no maternal immunity to pass on. And of course, not in top condition, so not enough stamina to fight. I am so sorry for you, that is heartbreaking. Poor little puppy. Owning a puppy should be a joyful experience, so difficult when it is a heartbreak. It costs $18 for a bottle of Drontal puppy syrup, which bumps off quite a few worms. Why would any breeder not worm pups? Because they didn't know, or only cared about the money. But, I think you would have a case for fair trading. If the puppy died within a short time of purchase, and the vet is willing to write a statement saying that it had parvo when you got it, you may find that the pup was "not suitable for the purpose intended" and the seller will be ordered to refund your money. I never read those ads, but why not complain to the government department which is responsible for microchipping? And to the RSPCA if pups are being sold u.8 weeks? That may achieve better results than complaining to the owner. MadDogLady - a survey between cross and purebred dogs was done overseas. Sweden? Scandinadia? Purebreds came out better than cross breds. Fact is, some dogs are healthy, some are not. Good genetics, good food, good housing and good husbandry lets them start off right, then good ownership keeps them that way. Plenty of polygenic conditions are exacerbated by wrong care, exercise and food.

A friend visited a psychic. The psychic knew nothing about her. The psychic told her that the pup she was keeping from the litter she had at that time was what-ever-his-name-was come back to her as a pup. As the psychic didn't know she even owned a dog (she assures me there were no hairs on her clothes), so how could she know about the dog who died, and the litter?

My thought exactly Everyone has given fantastic advice here Jed, schips shed quite a lot, so I'm not too sure they would be suitable. I thought maybe whippet? Standard poodles recieve such a bad rap, they are beautiful dogs, and I love the unclipped look The person didn't want the grooming she perceived a Shetland Sheepdog would need. Schips don't need all that much grooming. She didn't ask about shedding!! I reckon Schips are very wash and wear dogs, but not for everyone. And yes, whippets are low grooming too - of course

Each breed is individual and nothing is quite the same. But maybe you could suggest a Min Pin or a Schipperke? I can't think of anything else much.

Steve Fact is, these oodle breeders are NOT registered breeders. So what if there are lots of registered breeders in Gippsland? Fact is, anyone doing this cross is, in my eyes, a grub or an extremely unaware, uninformed person who the public should not be buying dogs from. This is a a very unsuitable cross from a heap of points of view. It doesn't matter what's going on in NSW and whether there are bigger ooodley producers there or not, it was Gippsland which was mentioned. Even Rob Waterhouse wouldn't give any money on the producer of these labradoodles in Gippsland not being a puppy farm. And maybe it isn't a puppy farm, but as you say, you would have to go to there to know for sure. Why bother? And Steve is right - there are heaps of labrador/poodle crosses, or suspected crosses in pounds, give one of them a home.

And that would be any one of the disgusting, skanky puppy farms in that area, with 6 dogs out the front looking good, and 500 in sweltering tin sheds breeding breeding breeding with absolutely no hope of release except death, in squalid conditions without any mental stimulation whatsoever. An oodle doodle may be as stated on the "paperwork" or it may not be, there is no controlling body so the producer can say what he wants. Most of the dogs in these puppy farms are not sourced from good quality dogs because no one with good quality dogs will do business with them, so they are using 4th or 5th rate parents, from other puppy farms or pet shops, where HD, PRA and other nasties may be endemic and no tests are conducted. Where the dogs may have wry mouths, or eye problems. Oh, and it is a myth that the nasty genes hop on their magic carpet and leave the body when breeds are crossed. A swindle on the unsuspecting public. The coat may be non shedding, or it may be shedding, or it may be a mix of both, where the shedding lab hair is caught up in the poodle wool, forming mats which require expertise and experience (and a big pair of clippers) to resolve. These dogs were never meant to be. People breed them because they have nfi what they are doing, nor do they care for the dogs they produce, or the people who buy them. Why would people not go for a purebred registered dog, where the parentage is guaranteed, where the pups are property raised and socialised during their formative weeks? Where the parents are good quality dogs, which have been health tested? Where the mothers are content and pass that sense of contentment to the pups, so they do not grow to be nervy anxious adults. Chances of getting health problems are less. Labradoodley things are very very cute --- but so are Irish Water Spaniels, Portugese Water Dogs, Spinone, and Lagotti. Lagotti come in many stunning colours. The stand out choice - for me - would be a poodle. Smart, very trainable, reliably NEVER sheds, lives a long life, easy to live with, happy to be part of the family and if from a decent kennel with tested parents, will have no hereditary problems. Great with kids, great watchdog, probably smarter than you are, but prepared to disguise that to keep you happy, cand an absolute delight to live with. And much CUTER than a doodle. BUT - the dog should be wearing the scruffy look, not the lion clip. Puppy or lamb clip, let it grow out a bit, and there is your labradoodley - not bred in the slums, but bred in the purple. Ready to uphold his heritage, and to be a reliable and trustworthy friend to your family all his life. Google lamb and puppy clips, show them to the man of the family, get one, and let him believe it is a doodly thing, if that is what he wants, he will be happy How could someone bypass Black Caviar for the nag which came 14th at the Oodnagalavie races last June. Same concept. I just don't understand it. Poodles don't believe they are "poofy" nor do they behave so. A friend had a choc poodle in a messy "do" who would stand and defend his territory. Tradesmen were terrified of him. Nothing poofy there. And he didn't look at all poodle like. She used to tell them he was a Transylvanian Fighting Dog. I saw the most beautiful silver and apricot standard poodles in the back of a tradies truck in lion clips. Obviously a tradie with no hangups whatsoever Additionally, from a mans' point of view, all the chicks love poodles, so he will expand his social contacts. Oh, do tell me they chose a purebred dog, and weren't sucked in by the hype and advertising,

Not recognized by the ANKC. There are a couple of Aussie Bulldog associations - I think one is "Australian Bulldog Association" or something like that, and those societies are probably issuing their own papers.

Always ask before touching. Blackdog Don't worry about it. Someone was obviously having the menopause that day!! Most exhibitors would be ok with the public patting the dog. Those who want to showcare their breeds and purebred dogs, and are exhibiting dogs of sound temperament who enjoy being patted, will say "yes".

Rebbecca, I have sent you a message, please check your messages. :) You need to know why the dog has been declared dangerous. It may be that the ACO thinks he looks like a pit bull, in which case you need serious help now.

dogsaremyworld Have you read, or are you aware of the numerous scientific studies on the disadvantages of desexing? Quite a large percentage of the responsible dog owning public is actually able to manage their dogs' sexuality without resorting to desexing. Why would anyone wish a major operation on a dog when a responsible owner will prevent unwanted puppies? Talk about a nanny state. The RSPCA did a good job publicising desexing all those years ago, but it has certainly gone overboard now

Surely the people who proposed this petition cant have thought about the implications in the long term? People who show and don't breed (which is the majority of ANKC members) couldn't have entire dogs, so most of the people who show would be wiped out. The ramifications are huge And how discriminatory is it to force people to have purebred dogs? Some people prefer x bred dogs ... and not designer dogs either. The cause of pound populations is not the number of pups being bred. People who are in favour of legislation to prevent breeding have not read the studies. Every study done shows that dogs are sent to the pound to do "not meeting owners' expectations" and preventing breeding will not stop that. Education and careful homing of pups will stop that, not mandatory desexing. We have enough numpty laws already.