Jed

Are they AKC registered, Sandgrubber? Make you go if you were a lab breeder There are blue boxers registered by the UKC. *sigh*

Really??????? So your recommendation is to not do a course if someone hasn't recommended but go look for a nameless book on Amazon???? I named a book, and I suggested others would recommend different books. And yes, obviously that is my recommendation. Why do you feel you have the right to question that? I would not have written it UNLESS it was my recommendation. Do you have a problem with that? If so, why? Others have recommended other things. Why have you not asked them the same questions? No one else said not to do the course. So according to your logic university students shouldn't do any courses unless they have a personal recommendation for every unit the want to do? This is very odd and naive advice to give. "No one else said not to do the course" I didn't say not to do it, you might like to go back and re-read. So, according to you, everyone has to believe the same thing, and give the same advice? If the advice from everyone is not the same, is it "odd" or "naive", or both. Is that not so? We could dispense with these forums, which have always given a balance of opnion - and have just one person answering all posts each day? Then all opinions would agree. No, it is not odd or naive advice, it might seem odd to you, but then, I might think some things you say are odd, or stupid, or naive, or lunatic, but restrain myself from commenting, because it is a public forum, and everyone is entitled to an opinion, and I have the tolerance and good manners to allow you to have your opinions, no matter what I think of them. You might try doing the same. That you think Dogs & How to Breed Them is "a nameless book on Amazon" is a perfect example of your naivety and lack of knowledge My advice was to study ONE OF THE VERY BEST BOOKS on dog breeding, and puppy raising, BY ONE OF THE MOST WELL RESPECTED BREEDERS AND JUDGES IN THE WORLD. A book which has constantly been reprinted for the past 30 years, because it is so good. Not my opinion, accepted fact. With your minimal knowledge, I would not expect you to know anything of Hilary Harmer, but I am surprised anyone with any education would denigrate something you know nothing whatsoever about. You have, I presume, done the MDBA course "introduction to Breeding" so you can speak with authority of it and recommend it? Would you like to share that with the forum? The op is wondering why there should be an argument. S/he is not the only one!!!! You haven't answered all my questions, you might like to do so. And you might like to tell us why university students shouldn't do any courses unless they have had a personal recommendation? What do the mdba courses and university courses have in common in your opinion? And why you believe my advice is "odd" and "naive"? Thanks, look forward to your response.

I was under the impression that the standard were drawn up to describe a dog which could fulfill his duties in the best manner. I don't think the standards were drawn up just for the show ring. And working dog and show dog standards should be the same. The better breeders do produce dogs which can win in the ring - and work....whatever that work happens to be. People who seek dogs which will work stock rarely seek it in show circles, so "show line" dogs rarely get an opportunity to work. However some acquit them selves well at trials - and the very few who are actually working, seem to do so in a competent manner. Hi Jed. For the border collie, the registry for the breed started in the Uk 1906, ISDS.. there was no physical standard then and it still functions today as the premier registry for border collies and still no standard. The dogs were also registered down here in the state sheepdog registers, no standards. All over the world there were working registries for border collies and no standards. Then the first show standard (I think was written in NZ but the Ozzies say the did, so they can fight it out), it was the the the 1950's late I think, and it was to bring the breed into the kennel club/show ring for the first time. The working people did not move into the ANKC then and to this day they stay in the working registries. The working registries are far outstripping in numbers of dogs and members the show registries. In fact here is OZ and NZ you have the highest number of show bred dogs anywhere. I had never seen a show bred border collie till I moved here, that is how rare they were in the US and Canada and the UK till very recent history. There are still no standards today in the working registires and this is were the bulk of the dogs are registered around the world. For border collies, standards are totally a kennel club show concept and have nothing to do with the development or the breeding of the working border collie. The popularity of working border collies contiunes to grow and there is no disire at all to adopt a standard into the working registires. This is just the way it is. I do not think anyone needs to take offence if they are on the standard side of the border collie fence. Having two types does not discredit either side. The show folks and their dogs also serve a vital and worthy function. The dog world has to come to grips with these ideas. We do not have to all be the same, we do not have to all breed the same types of dogs, nor do we have to all have the same goals. We can be different and not be bad breeders. In fact it is good, good for the dogs and good for us dog lovers. I also love history, but when it comes to saving our breeds and saving purebreds, we had better be able to justify the state of our dogs in today's world. Standards or no standards, this is already the declared bottom line and we better hear it and be ready to respond. Thanks for that. There are working dogs other than border collies. What the sheep and cattle herders do is up to them - not in my ball park

Really??????? So your recommendation is to not do a course if someone hasn't recommended but go look for a nameless book on Amazon???? I named a book, and I suggested others would recommend different books. And yes, obviously that is my recommendation. Why do you feel you have the right to question that? I would not have written it UNLESS it was my recommendation. Do you have a problem with that? If so, why? Others have recommended other things. Why have you not asked them the same questions?

Oops, sorry moosemum!!

I don't believe showing and breeding are mutually exclusive. Some people love showing, some don't. There was no problem until about 20 years ago, when animal rights (direct from US) told us that if we bred more than one litter every 2 years, or we did not breed to produce further show stock for ourselves, we were some kind of puppy farmer. Sometimes I show, sometimes I don't. I show when I feel like it. I don't give a rats rectum whether people label me a "puppy farmer" or a byb. That is their choice. I don't breed many - my choice - I breed less than I used to, and I admit to a certain gratification when people who look down on me are beaten by a dog I bred - usually in other ownership. I love it when dogs I bred win 29 point challenges, or specialties, or royals. I breed dogs which do win from dogs which have never been shown. The people who know me know who and what I am, and that is all that matters. I don't care about the others. I don't have a website, I don't advertise. It's not about being a person who is known as successful from my own advertising or their website. It is about having the dogs, caring for them, and producing litters, having that pleasure, and hoping my breeding will "improve the breed". My putting dogs on the ground which will help if they are bred with, and by producing happy healthy pets which others admire and covet I think the labelling which has come to us from overseas is set to sink us all. You do what you want to do. If you show and win, you are probably sleeping with the judge, if you show and lose, your dogs are no good. If you don't show, you are a puppy farmer or a byb. So, it doesn't matter what you do, you will be labelled. What you do is NOT label others, and ignore the labelling/ Know that you are all in it together, and try to be supportive of others - even if they bad mouth you. IMHO, a smile is the best answer to -- everything!! As you go, you will make more and better friends - true friends. On one hand, people say I am a byb, on the other, my friends are successful exhibitors, and all breed judges. But - this pre supposes that you undersand the standard for your breed, and know the extension to the standard inside out, that you have looked closely at the top dogs of the breed, and that you had a friends or a mentor who will assess your pups and give you honest critiques on them, that you will know enought to use SUITABLE dogs, not necessarily your own, and not necessarily champion dogs, but dogs which will imrpove what you have ---- and that you have enough knowledge to know what is what.

Pekinese Shih Tzu Chihuahua - long hair After swearing I would never have another small dog.....I decided years ago that I loved these breeds for their sense of humour, faithfulness and their intelligence. I have known some. Beautiful dogs, I yearn to own one. I always said when I was old and gaga. I would have a show Shih Tzu in full coat, he could sit on my knee when I was up, and I would be there brushing, brushing, brushing him. And because Shih Tzu are guard dogs, he could fly for the throats of bossy nurses trying to force feed me mashed pumpkin. Or alternatively, he could lick excess pumpkin off my bib!! On weekends, I would find a handler, go to the shows with my walker, (only close ones) amd cheer them them on from the sidelines!! I could probably chuck my teeth at judges and my walker at those who got it REALLY wrong!!

No one should do a course on anything unless someone who has completed the course has recommended it. Have you considered buying a few books on breeding - check out A mazon, or ask on here. I like Hilary Harmer's Dogs and How to Breed them, and a few others, and people will recommend others, I am sure. Much cheaper, and if you read books you like, you can then recommend them to enquirers, which take the heat off you.

I was under the impression that the standard were drawn up to describe a dog which could fulfill his duties in the best manner. I don't think the standards were drawn up just for the show ring. And working dog and show dog standards should be the same. The better breeders do produce dogs which can win in the ring - and work....whatever that work happens to be. People who seek dogs which will work stock rarely seek it in show circles, so "show line" dogs rarely get an opportunity to work. However some acquit them selves well at trials - and the very few who are actually working, seem to do so in a competent manner.

Gawd, having Pal puppy would make a dog eat dog poo!! for the nutrients Adding paw paw or pineapple , just a little, to their diet should help. Worth a go anyhow, and yes, muzzle at the park

What a tragedy. The question must be why on earth they took a dog they owned for ONE DAY out in public, and to a school, when they demonstrably couldn't control the dog, and obviously has NFI. A little boy has been damaged, the dog will probably lose his life, the owners will probably be fined ----- all because they had so little dog sense, or such an inflated opinion of their handling capacity. Thank heavens for the rescuer. People who are not responsible should not own dogs. Does no one tell them "keep hold of the lead"?

Such a worrying condition - I am thinking of you, and your dog in this difficult time.

My father died from cancer when he was 45 years old. Never smoked a cigarette in his life. My mother smoked from when she was maybe 16 until about 35, she also drinks well beyond the recommended daily limit and generally has a pretty unhealthy lifestyle, but she's an ox. She also grew up in a small farming town and was regularly exposed to all kinds of freaky deaky chemicals as a child and laughs at the precautions people take today. Wait, her father drinks alcohol at breakfast and has been smoking for over 60 years and he too is going strong! Well this must mean that smoking and drinking are good for you right? Or maybe it was the farm chemicals? Just because you know of one, two or even several people who had different experiences, this does not change the fact that cigarettes contain harmful chemicals that aren't good for you and many of these chemicals cause cancers under both lab and real world settings. None of our personal observations are of statistical significance. Now does that mean that if you smoke, you will get cancer, or if you don't smoke that you won't? No, because you're unique and other factors come into play. Does this mean though that smoking is bad for you? Yes, it's virtually impossible to predict exactly how you as an individual (or your pets) will be affected by smoking, but we can safely say that you won't be better for it. Second hand smoke from cigarettes is damn nasty too. These people you know of may only have been exposed to small amounts that don't seem to have affected anyone else negatively, but perhaps for them, it was too much. One day we'll probably know a lot more about this sort of stuff, and that might be a good thing or it might not... As to why would someone would want to smoke in the first place. Well, smoking makes people feel good, it's addictive and if your friends do something it can be hard to say no. It's kind of like when I go skiing and go off the main runs and ski really fast. Sure it's dangerous, if I crashed I'd probably die and not be found for ages. But it's my life, I think it's worth it and I firmly believe that people should be allowed to do what they like with their lives so long as it doesn't hurt anyone else. But you should be informed. I'm not disagreeing with you - and I don't really need a lecture, thanks but imho, it is always a good idea to keep your mind open to new and different ideas.

I think it is too glib and easy to blame cigarette smoke for cancers ... there are many other causes, and there is little explanation for some cancer deaths. I am not saying fags are never to blame, but there are other causes too, and we should be aware of them. Until about 20 years ago, I had never heard of a dog dying from cancer. My vet said that was because old dogs tended to get cancer, and "in those days" dogs died before they were old enough to get cancer - and - diagnostic techniques are better now. I agree with that, but I think industrial pollution, and "modern life" is the cause. More people smoked 20 years ago+ too. And I remember a lo of dogs living to be old, and popping off from "old age" in their teens. I think industrial pollution is a huge problem, and the carcinogenic effect of lead free fuel is ignored. Fancy sitting at a footpath cafe eating and drinking with all the car fumes blowing all over you. "Would you like a tumor with that?" jacqui835 I kew a lot of people who died of cancer of one sort or another, and none of them smoked. Lost a friend last week, he was diagnosed with untreatable lung cancer in January. A friend's mother died last July from lung cancer. They are part of a very long list. Although I don't have a problem with smoking = cancer, I do have a problem with people who would never have been exposed to much cigarette smoke dying of cancer which was "smoking related". I lived in a small town which was a major cancer capital. Hardly anyone smoked. I have never lived anywhere where so few people smoked, but the use of fertilizers, weed sprays, insecticides was very common, including frequent aerial bombardment of crops. Nekhbet What does the vet think caused the murmur to escalate?

Fumes from unleaded petrol are carcinogenic. There are plenty of links, if anyone would like to check.

I do think it would be safest to take him to the vet in the morning. It could be bites, it could be an allergy, it could be puppy acne - it could be a heap of things ... most of them not too serious, but if allowed to get away, could result in misery for him, and hair loss. Other option is to ask the breeder. I presume he didn't have it when you collected him? good luck

This is what I answered There would be no problems in the first generation. I mentioned it because the progression of carrier x carrier = affected would eventually mean the vast % of the breed was affected .... and where do they go then? Then I am back to - if affected had no problem, why bother developing a test? And if affected was a problem, why is the certain breeding of affected pups being advocated by the article? I have no problem with mating carriers to produce either carriers or clear stock. That is why we shelled out for DNA tests, so we would know that we were doing. I do think it is rather a pity that some of these articles advocate stuff which no one would do in the real world. See earllier post. And I fully understand your last post. I just wonder whether the authors of the paper understand. This is how it goes in the real world ... the bitch is a carrier, if I mate her to Ch Blind As, who is also a carrier, some of the pups will be affected - or all of them. I think the lines Blind As has will compliment my lines, but I don't want affected pups. So, I mate to Ch Sees For Miles, who is clear. He may not be exactly the epitome of what I want to produce, but he will give me clear pups. I have the pups DNA tested, and I keep a clear bitch. I can then send that bitch to Ch Blind As, and produce clear or carrier pups - which I can DNA test before running on. And I will have the lines I desire, and hopefully, a good dog to continue with. And yes, I do take the view that breeding homozygous carriers to carriers to produce affected stock is wrong. Unless - see my earlier post. Which is why I replied. I have been breeding for a long time, I tend to see the generation after this one --- and I plan so the problem of a kennel full of affected dogs never occurs. And this is off topic anyhow, and I think I have clarified it enough.

And you breed carrier to carrier - so the next generation are all affected. It would certainly want to be something which had nil effect even if the dog was affected. And, I have to ask, why bother developing tests - which as we all know, cost zillions and which breeders mostly pay for - for a disease which has so little affect on the breed that affected dogs can be produced without problems?? In fact, so little affect that it is recommended that carriers be bred with? Loony science. Or was that a test case to see if we were watching? And yes, I do presume that C x C = A, as it is in most diseases. Particularly homozygous carriers. Does the article presume that all clear dogs have other problems? You mention using affected - I am not sure what the moi for CEA is,not having had to face it - but I would suppose that A x clear = carrier? There is no problem using affected dogs or carriers of anything, UNLESS affected stock are being produced. Why bother to produce affected, if there is no good reason for it, or if the dogs are going to have some health problem down the track. Am I missing something? I am sorry, my internet connection is too slow to access the site, so I will take your word that it is an ok one.

Shortstep Pardon?

If carriers are bred to clears they will not produce affected pups. Incorrect. It depends on the mode of inheritance and this is unknown in many diseases. Sheridan, I understood that where there were tests to identify carriers of diseases, in each case, the mode of inheritance was known? I thought if the test couldn't id carriers unless there was a moi?

My parents both smoked, and our dogs lived well into their teens without any problems. We had birds too, which all seemed to fall off the perch at some ancient age. My sister also smokes, and her rottweilers lived to 15 and 16. I don't believe there is any evidence that smoking damages pets in any way. If you don't wont your dog to smell smokey, leave him at home when visiting smokers.

Snap!!! Gretel A Leap of Boxers

Condolence on the loss of your pet. I agree with Aphra. I presume that the dog and the cat were both inside and outside at the time? Although the dog may not have been responsible, he would be my main suspect. I don't think the male could could have done it. And sometimes, the damage done by dogs' teeth looks ok on the skin, but a lot of damage is done to the organs - or the neck. It is possible that a fight between your cat and the male erupted, the dog was drawn into it, something unfortunate happened and your cat died ... I think it is entirely possible that your cat may have been damaged accidentally. However, not having the detecting skills of Hercule Poirot - I dunno. You could maybe take the cat to a vet for an opinion. If you do get another cat, simply ensure that the dog and cat are never together when you are out. Obviously, there is no problem when you are home.

The only reason to withhold water is on veterinary advice, with veterinary supervision.

...and Shortstep, the proof of the pudding is .....................