orrd

i think the only issue is the breeding and selling them part not the suitability of them as pets.

the event was at the local showgrounds which they would have paid to use but i as a local own the grounds more than them due to rates. i wasn't being a pain, lots of people kept trying to sell me puppies and hanging crap on the other competitors and complaining about the judges. i asked a few dumb questions like so thats a champion border collie - it must be good at herding sheep?

hey Akyala doesn't mean we cant exchange views just cos they are different - i'm all about improvement of myself and the breed i love. as far as the wolf thing, bit too speculative to comment on and if this links to a dingo context is even more speculative - i do ask you this tho exactly what traits would a dingo posses that can not be found in one of the specialist breeds selective bred for ... that exist, i am interested in your answer there are some things of interest that i know of but i will await yr reply before i mention them - just seeing where yr heads at before i bother to bother with ya.

don't worry not as dramamtic as i made it sound - personally i do not allow any dog unsupervised access to minors, don't care what the dog is, i get called extreme for this but hey just this last month a lady i work with left her child with a relative with a 100% safe family pet, the dog was eating out of its bowl like it had done evryday for years, this time the child was next to the dog unsupervised and kicked the food bowl out from under the 100% safe family pets mouth, never reported to police i dont think but dog now no longer lives the child screams at the sight of every approaching dog and is still getting treatment and i no longer have such extreme views?? no person here or anywhere else can say that there dog would never bite another person - that is wishful thinking, i just take it that bit further and don't give mine the opportunity, does not follow they are monsters but they are far from pets and as a responsible owner i have to take responsibilty for that fact.

smf?? i was baiting and off topic which is uneccesary, on another thread perhaps. question, do organisors of ANKC have the legal right to ask you to remove your dog from an ANKC event cos it is not registered with the ANKC even tho it is registered with the local council?? i was not competing just socialising my pup and was not being a nuisance in any way. i complied with the order but want to question the validity of it. i will put in a formal complaint if i was lied to.

german shepherd - to the specs of the guy that created the breed, not the funny looking dumbed down ones called german shepherds by the breed registry (ok thats baiting couldn't help myself), why do you ask?

nah no crusader here, not worth the energy expenditure, my only passion is to fight stupidity and ignorance in the small ways that i can and to speak for those that don't otherwise have a voice - we are afterall supposed to be the species with the superior intelligence. so does that me a troll in yr estimation. who the hell is that person you mentioned and what did she do?? funny i already can't take my dog to dog shows, i used to do it for socialsation when he was a pup but apparantly you can't take a dog that isn't ANKC registered or something not even to just walk around - not sure if that is true but what event organisors told me, perhaps they were just scared when they got scent of a real dog.

many dingo owners like to emphasise how "just like any other dog-ish" their dingo is, if they are so ordinarily dog like then why not just get a regular dog?? can't wait for the day that there is nothing left of novelty/rare/exotic marketting to been exploit just for novelty, the focus for breeders will then have to shift from novelty/rare to actual quality which would be too much of a jump for most; hmm whats left to exploit, we've done the LGD's,done dingoes, basenji's, NSD's, mountain XXX dogs, the completed program to remove all functional working traits from the working breeds by show breeders....be a brief period of staring at each other wondering which bandwagon next...ah just start making up a history, a good story and a standard and registry to tell the lie, Boerbell anyone. Oord, you really do need to stop trying to pidgeon hole people like that. the real facts are the great majority of dingo's end up in a pet home because they were rescues. as long as we have the right to rescue a baby any species people will and frankly ive never seen one end up dumped in some rescue society's pen not trying to pidgeaon hole but if the pidgeon hole fits....

many dingo owners like to emphasise how "just like any other dog-ish" their dingo is, if they are so ordinarily dog like then why not just get a regular dog?? can't wait for the day that there is nothing left of novelty/rare/exotic marketting to been exploit just for novelty, the focus for breeders will then have to shift from novelty/rare to actual quality which would be too much of a jump for most; hmm whats left to exploit, we've done the LGD's,done dingoes, basenji's, NSD's, mountain XXX dogs, the completed program to remove all functional working traits from the working breeds by show breeders....be a brief period of staring at each other wondering which bandwagon next...ah just start making up a history, a good story and a standard and registry to tell the lie, Boerbell anyone.

Is is the law in most states that all pups be microchipped prior to sale. And you pay more for some crossbreds in pet shops than you pay for health tested parents breeds from ANKC registered breeders. .But it isn't purchase price that determines whether or not a dog gets dumped. Once again, it is when the dog fail to live up to its owner's expectations (which with uninformed purchases are often unrealistic) that sees it at the pound. And yes, there is research on that too. Then I suggest you do so to the appropriate canine control. Veiled assertions about knowledge of wrong doing here won't accomplish anything. Given that ANKC breeders can't register a litter if one is born to a bitch every season and are restricted in the numbers of litters any bitch can produce, surely you'd have to agree that this is a positive step against "over breeding'. However if you're concluding that dogs end up in pounds because too many are bred, again you would be misinformed and that there is research (actually conducted to inform the mandatory desexing debate) that refutes that. Preaching to the choir on that. However you're the one who made a blanket statement that it "should be harder for breeders". Crikey, how much harder do you want it to be for responsible breeders when there are plenty of "breeders" out there who don't pay any attention to the laws they are subject to now??? good points, thanks for that, i would like to see the research on mandatory desexing if you have link, that would be educational (i am not doubting you), "...it is when the dog fail to live up to its owner's expectations (which with uninformed purchases are often unrealistic) that sees it at the pound. And yes, there is research on that too. i can believe this more than previous but if there is actual research on this i would appreciatte it. maybe the missing links are education/briefing for the buyer and stricter controls on advertising hype, they are related the more ignorant the buyer the more the seller can hyoe and/BS/lie and the buyer not realise untill the dog is 18mo, for example i cringe at all the german shepherds getting sold that will protect your family, one example of a complete lie as very few german shepherds being bred could protect themselves in reality let alone protect anyone else - i would like to be genuinely more informed on this debate and lessen the suffering, so links would be a starting point.

Whose mess? 20% of the dogs born in this country are whelped by ANKC registered breeders. Yet the pounds aren't full of ANKC registered purebred dogs that have been dumped by their owners are they? If you want to mop up the mess, it pays to be certain of who's making it before you take steps to clean it up. Lumping all "breeders" into the one basket is hardly fair on those doing the right thing. great another topic - my attention span is not good enough too keep up with the last. your right it's hardly fair, so 20% you say, then to make a comparison we would have to assume that about 80% (in pound/rescue) would be non-ANKC dogs and about 20% would be, if the number comes out much less than 20% you would be on to something - then you would have to consider cause and effect - do some fraction of the 80% dodge ANKC breeders on financial grounds etc. if yr gonna quote stats then you shouldn't prolly make these statements; Yet the pounds aren't full of ANKC registered purebred dogs that have been dumped by their owners are they? me and you both don't know that - i would guess you are right but with out finding out the actual numbers and scaling it to the numbers sold by each and determining cause and effect it just quoting stats to obfuscate. Actually, for the ACT I do know that and I'm not obfuscating about anything. If you're going to hurl bricks at breeders, then expect those who aren't contributing significantly to the issue of unwanted dogs to take issue with it. I also know that pups sourced from petshops are OVER represented in the dumping stats where I live because the RSPCA collect such information. I'm not pulling these figures out of thin air. Add to this the Uni of Qld research that found that responsibly bred purebred dogs were far less likely to be dumped than other dogs and I think you can take the guesswork clear out of the issue. There are no simple answers to complex problems and "desex em all" only harms the responsible. Vets cant' desex dogs they never see and a not insignificant proportion of the sources of unwanted dogs fit into that category. i totally agree that registered breeders are a form of regulation that helps stem the tide and i am all for it, no argument here. as far as cause and effect it gets messier. people most likely pay more money for a dog from a reputable breeder than one they buy at the markets where there are no obligation for micro-chipping, vet checks....etc. generally people that pay a higher purchase price for anything are more likely to have considered their initial investment and not impulse buy at the sight of the cute fluffy puppy in a cage at the market or pet shop. if you only just decided to buy a dog when you happened to be walking past the pet shop window then my guess that person is just as likely to give it up when it is no longer cute and fluffy and requires vet bills, training, care....i could also name quite a few ANKC breeders that sell unregistered, no nothing...etc dogs to people at a heavily discounted price with no papers. to really tease out what the statistics mean is not done at a glance you certainly could not conclude that because someone is ANKC registered that overbreeding will decrease - no such conclusion i believe would be valid imo. there are also some reputable breeders that are not ANKC registered, and some ANKC breeders that are not reputable. and some non ANKC breeders that breed great dogs as much as ANKC breeders that breed very low quality dogs - messy huh. i support the concept of registered breeders in general but know that alone does not imply quality or ethics but possibly more likely to be.

Whose mess? 20% of the dogs born in this country are whelped by ANKC registered breeders. Yet the pounds aren't full of ANKC registered purebred dogs that have been dumped by their owners are they? If you want to mop up the mess, it pays to be certain of who's making it before you take steps to clean it up. Lumping all "breeders" into the one basket is hardly fair on those doing the right thing. great another topic - my attention span is not good enough too keep up with the last. your right it's hardly fair, so 20% you say, then to make a comparison we would have to assume that about 80% (in pound/rescue) would be non-ANKC dogs and about 20% would be, if the number comes out much less than 20% you would be on to something - then you would have to consider cause and effect - do some fraction of the 80% dodge ANKC breeders on financial grounds etc. if yr gonna quote stats then you shouldn't prolly make these statements; Yet the pounds aren't full of ANKC registered purebred dogs that have been dumped by their owners are they? me and you both don't know that - i would guess you are right but with out finding out the actual numbers and scaling it to the numbers sold by each and determining cause and effect it just quoting stats to obfuscate.

That is never going to happen. so do we all just stop trying evrytime something is difficult?? - seems a bit defeatist Alright, you go out and try to keep a wandering hunting dog on a particular protected parcel of land, when slow moving sheep are just over there, you take all the farmer's guns so that he can't shoot the dingoes when they don't notice that they've walked into unprotected land and kill his stock, you take all his dogs away so that there's never any chance of a dingo to dog mating and he can just bring the stock in without dogs. Exactly. This is the real world, national parks dont have dog proof fences, they dont even have kangaroo proof fences. I remember counting 200 kangaroos in among a friends cattle one morning. His property was beside what????????? National Park. Imagine the screaming if he then allowed his cattle to shift into the next neighbours for a feed now the National park kangaroo's had cleaned his place out of feed? we dont live in the ideal world. you guys win, i'm out.

would breeding less quantity nation-wide be so bad really???, you seem to have a babies and bathwater outlook imo - does anyone have actual figures on dogs destroyed thru RSPCA/pound etc in auss. - it is staggeringly high in north america, sounds mean but imo way too many breeders are breeding animals that should never have been born in the first place, i know that will outrage some but it is my honest opinion and not trying to stir and no i am not peta, far from it before anyone makes claims. i think it should be harder for breeders - vets promoting blanket desexing is a crude but justifiable strategy - they get to mop up our mess way more than they should have to.

That is never going to happen. so do we all just stop trying evrytime something is difficult?? - seems a bit defeatist

the internet is so painful to explain anything - i don't think dingoes fall into the same category as breeds bred for generation and selected specifically to go against all of nature and fight members of their own species to the death - i am not retarded - i in general agree with a limited form of BSL - which would include limited ownership of the dingo - I DO NOT MEAN ALL DINGOES SHOULD BE DESTRYOYED - I DO NOT EQUATE DINGOES AND PIT BULLS - i am refferring to ownership of these animals as pets. if no one owned one as a pet and they flourished in their natural environment in a protected parcel of land eg national park away from clashes with land owners so they don'e get shot, die painfully in traps that maim them, die horribly from 10-80, cross breed with domestic dogs becuase irresponsible owners can't control their pets....etc, etc then i would personally be happy. hope that is clear enough - i am not linking dingoes to pit bulls in behaviour, and i do not support BSL as destroying all dogs based on a specific breed, i support that dog ownership should be more regulated and YES due to certain dog traits, certain phenotypes/looks that attract certain human personality types i think some breeds as a blanket statement come under the microscope, even tho most of the banned breeds in oz have never ever entered this country!!! - so there is no evidence to support their banning here, it is baggage from the worst of human kind that decent people are punished for. this is biology so you will always find numerous examples of individuals that DO NOT fit the stereotype or genetics but when dealing with ignorant, uneducated masses of people external legislative controls are the simplest easiest most efficient way (NOT THE BEST WAY) of getting a message out, it will not stop the complete ignorant, no laws on anything ever have stopped some people doing anything ever in the history of law but across whole cultures and populations there has to be some controls or attempts at them and the good will suffer the most, thats life in the big city. all this is my opinion obviously and trying to explain complex issues on the net is always going to not work well. don't know how you interpretted my posts as somehow being anti... cull em all dingo??? but you did. i can't explain my position any better than i just did. my personal dogs are not pets and the price i pay as an owner is constant round the clock vigilance and never being able to relax for a minute when the public are involved, in fact they rarely get exposed to the general public and when they do its under strict physical controls and restraints, self imposed constraints by a responsible dog owner, sux for me and my dogs in some ways as they are almost completely isolated from the public and will never be allowed to just hang out at a dog show or whatever but thats how it has to be everyday for their entire existence. and when idiot pet owners with FiFi off leash comes running up barking and snarling at my restrained dogs trying to mind their own business and i have to choke my own dogs that are being assualted to stop Fifi becoming dead FIfi i'm somehow the bad guy??????? i got more to be threatened by BSL tahn most but i still support a form of it along the lines of punishing the owners. BTW before you assume i do not own bully breeds or crosses thereof.

So because Azaria (RIP) was killed by a dingo, an individual dingo, you are now condemning the whole dingo race as wild, untrustworthy creatures that should remain where they are? I fear you have had very little to do with a well raised pet dingoes. sorry missed that the first time - YES, YES, YES thats EXACTLY and ALL i am saying. someone finally gets it. OK don't get rude. since your reply in purple to what is said in red then how can what you said be interpreted as any but pro Breed Specific Legislation? getting all snarly doesnt change that. actually it wasnt me who decided you must be a troll. believe it or not others in the house were reading it too. made the suggestion and found the song for you. incidently that chap is a world famous singer. worth listening too anyway. far more children (and adults) have died from the attacks of known domestic breeds if the papers are to be believed. The excuse for the introduction of BSL in the first place. then you cite one and condem a race? Same mindset, same waste of innocent lives for any that are judged to 'look' like. might be worth the effort to remove a littlie of the froth n foam from your previous post just realised you said "proffesional BSL troll"? In the debates I and the family n friends there has always been the Pro side and the Con side. Pro BSL means 'FOR BSL' Pro means 'for' and con means 'against' lol i thought you were calling me a proffesional troll as in "pro", didn't think of the other debate meaning. to be honest i actually was not familiar with BSL and had to look it up so in one sense you were wrong but the twist is once i learned what BSL is then i have to say to a limited extent i am pro BSL. so you were right but not for the reasons you thought. i am not really for the legislation in detail as i have only briefly read the intent but for the protection of dogs and people i think there is a logic to it that appeals to me. can't explain all my reasons now but in short some (many but not all) of the bully breed owners i have talked really have no business owning a dog selectively bred with an inbuilt hair trigger (and many do if you have seen the real ones) and genetically selected animal aggression - genetics is real and so are the consequences, some real morons own these dogs and the dogs end up filling the pounds awaiting destruction, they are mostly purchased (as a blanket statement) as penis extensions by insecure males, based on my limited experience of talking to a lot of people that own these dogs - they have no job for them - they like the look. BSL imo is totaly appropriatte in these cases and i would support any vote to extend it to dingoes as is already the case in some states. i also support a policy of punishing incompetent owners and protecting the dogs. complex issues but in being wrong you are right and i didn't even know what BSL was. i got no problem with you man/lady, the weak dogs that judged me tho should have spoke for themselves instead of putting you up to posting the troll vid. are we all good now - no probs my end, just another dog nut here. cheers

I've never heard that before... I'm off to google scholar Wasn't able to find anything... err is that feral cats or wild cats??? jk i will go to the grave with pluto as a planet and dingoes as wild indigenous australian dogs - science can sue me.

OK then let me refine the question - the context here is primarily a pet forum considering the pets laregely as companion type animals, give or take some more specialised sport or service roles. 1. from a behavioural perpective (not any taxinomical or other type classification) what traits/behaviours characterise a wild animal of the canine variety (but not limited to) with reference to an isolated population surviving in a distinct ecological niche for thousands of years. 2. from a behavioural perpective (not any taxinomical or other type classification) how would one distinguish/discriminate/classify/order between the traits/behaviour characteristics of a wild animal of the canine variety (but not limited to) with reference to an isolated population surviving in a distinct ecological niche to a feral animal in an isolated population surviving in a distinct ecological niche for thousands of years. 3. is it possible for a domesticated animal species to become wild given thousands of years and generations surviving in ecological isolation and independent of any human contact or will at most they will only be feral. 4. some tropical wild fish species have been observed in southern waters due to warmer ocean temperatures, does that wild fish cross a physical boundary such that when it swims over it its status goes from wild to feral and back again as it swims back and forth over that physical boundary. any input would be appreciatted. do scientists apply the same definitions of indigenous versus feral to human populations - all animals.

interesting - i can't see how a wild animal populations that has been living geographically isolated and intact for thousands of years could be considered anything other than wild indigenous animals - the technical academic definitions are clearly problematic - scientists choose convenient ways to classify things based on always arguable criteria eg the pluto is no longer a planet international media fiasco - the definitions do get reviewed and updated and things can fall into more than one category eg the animal kingdom groups. i don't doubt that there may be political pressure to define away the categorisation of the dingo to deny it wild and give it feral staus due to the historical link between the traditional sheep based economy and dingoes as a threat to that revenue stream. hell the GSD was banned forever due to cocky fears of them crossing into dingo populations and wiping out sheep numbers - hysteria that turned into policy.

Oh , so we have a pro BSL troll in our Midst no we dont actually?? - someone doesn't agree with you so that makes them a proffesional troll, or at least a feeble attempt by you to control a conversation by making character assination from behind a key board - i would be offended but the old saying about how only a fool would be offended by the words of of a fool. proffesional BSL troll - nice - the relevance to the topic is so tenuous it is basically non existent, hence you are baiting, off topic, belligerent, contributing nothing to the discussion and inflammatory cyber-bullying - who is the the real troll assol. i call yr feeble bullying attempt - lets both pm our phone numbers and identities to forum admin - i got no agenda other than a discussion on topics i find either interesting or personally important - whats yr agenda with the BSL - paranoid pit bull owner or something?? yr post seems to fit the profile. nice try assol

So because Azaria (RIP) was killed by a dingo, an individual dingo, you are now condemning the whole dingo race as wild, untrustworthy creatures that should remain where they are? I fear you have had very little to do with a well raised pet dingoes. [/quotY sorry missed that the first time - YES, YES, YES thats EXACTLY and ALL i am saying. someone finally gets it.

So because Azaria (RIP) was killed by a dingo, an individual dingo, you are now condemning the whole dingo race as wild, untrustworthy creatures that should remain where they are? I fear you have had very little to do with a well raised pet dingoes. err no, thats not what i am saying, or said??? - YOU made that up all by yrself - drinking?? does the word "race" apply to non-humans?? anthropomorhising???

do i take it you feel he should have let her die that day? not sure of the exact circumstances but in general i would answer yes, as brutal as that sounds. [/b]well does that mean you feel your opinion is more valid than that of those who choose to save a life? emotional pointscoring - lacks reasoned argument What make you think your opinion is more valid than that of those who do not have the same? i already outlined the basis for my opinions previously and they are based on observation and fact and general welfare of our wild/feral/native species...and some unneccesary emotive additional language. maybe its my turn to go, eh???? then go eh

that was a reply to someone else, about something else using someone else's quote...i'm confused wonder what the Chamberlain family would have to say about all this.