Willem

That's the point!...I often get suspicious when those terms seem to be defined by people that 'go with the flow'. It is just so convenient to adopt the ideas and attitudes of the majority - feels better, feels stronger, so must be right. In the past when people were killed for claiming the earth is not a disc, the mob - intentionally misled by authorities - could be excused as they didn't have access to knowledge, so they relied heavily on the people and organisations in charge. Think about that for most of the time even the Bible was only available in Latin and not readable for the normal mortal. The access to the WWW changed this and allows many people a much less biased attitude, but it also facilitates a much more subtly and more sneaky manipulation, and of course there is still the power of numbers (followers) that decide what is right and wrong.

...usually you can't advertise an AK-47 on eBay, gumtree or over a newspaper (not so sure about Fakebook so) - obviously there are some measures in place that makes shopping for this type of goods pretty difficult. Why not applying those measures to dogs?...Ebay already doesn't allow the sales of dogs (and other pets). Once you start controlling the sales in this environment, you will get the registration numbers up. I can't see that it would make it more difficult for people that want to do the right thing - for my own dog buying experience not much would have been different, beside that I would have had to send off application papers before we bought the dog. This strategy will only push the sale of dogs underground with sellers finding other places to sell their puppies. The people that are doing the right thing are not the problem, the problem is the people who are currently doing the wrong thing as they will continue to do the wrong thing ...underground means also higher costs (higher risks, higher fines...)...which will benefit the recognized and registered breeders. If I intend to buy a dog, why should I embark on such a risky business where I can get heavily fined and have to pay eventually even more for a dog if I can get my dog without this stress the legal way? Regulation does not stop drink driving which is high risk and has high fines. Regulation does not work. ..that's debatable ...I still believe that getting reminded of the hefty fines help some people to consider a plan B. Hefty fines are nothing else than 'positive punishment', losing the licence is 'negative punishment'...a little bit keen to state on a dog forum that those methods don't work. Actually what changes behaviour is changing attitudes through education. It's the endless campaigns that cost plenty of money. This ^^ education includes discussions, teaching, training ... and conditioning is part of training...

ok, that might be the dumbest idea I ever had :D : if iris scanning works - change the identification procedure to iris scanning; this would allow easy control and recording using mobile phones (ok, phone needs to have this feature, e.g. Lumia 950, otherwise you just could use the code you receive from council via an E-file); setup a dog-lotto; the ticket (you have to pay for it of course) is the scan / code of your dog's eyes you send off to the dog-lotto organisation ( obviously your dog needs to be registered to make this work!!!!) ...with the chance of winning AU$ 1 Mill the motivation of owners to register their dogs will be skyrocketing!!! Eta: ...would actually also work with a microchip number - iris scanning seems just to be more advanced.

...what would be a decent approach?...if there is a bigger problem in a society (and 'big' depends on the 'priority') you would normally get a commission together that investigate the problem and comes up with a proposal how to tackle it - here on a forum we can only scratch the surface a little bit. Such a commission requires people like you and other subject matter experts and politicians with a real interest. If there is really an interest in improving the current situation, such a proposal could be on the table in approx. 6 month time. Eta: the outcome and findings of the proposal would of course lead to the required measures... Eta:...hm, 4.2 mill dogs ...that's makes a lot of dog owners (even if there are owners with more than one dog)...makes a lot of voters... :)

ok,...at least I tried :), and with all the disclosed studies at least I know that I'm not doing anything wrong with paying a little bit extra and having an entire dog. At least I got what I want - it is a pity for the pounds so. The book I ordered from Ted Kerasote (Pukka's Promise: The Quest for Longer-Lived Dogs Paperback February 4, 2014) should come soon and might spark some new ideas - the broadcast was at least very interesting. Eta: your are too fast for me ...this post referred to you post #196...

Guns and cars are not puppies and right now there are thousands of puppies available for sale on line and in pet shops which come from people who do everything they can to breed more puppies and sell them for as much as they can get. you know this because they are advertised?...that would allow a task-force to track them down...and fine the people / parties involved. And yes, guns and cars and puppies are different things - but they are all 'goods' as part of a buying contract, and the principles to control the market are pretty much the same for any good...whether to adopt the required measures or not depends on the priority the problem has - and the evaluation of 'priority' seems to be one of the challenging questions to be answered too.

...I don't know :) ...an I never said it would be easy. Maybe we could look at other countries that have better records and find out how they do it?...it would definitely need some insider experience to cover up all the loop holes. If we accept the status quo as it is because changes are difficult to make we will have indeed dog owners in the future shouting 'I don't want de-sex my dog' and other 'but the pounds are full'...currently the pounds are full, no matter whether my dog is de-sexed or not.

underground means only lower costs if the laws are not enforced. Try to buy a weapon underground - will it be cheaper than doing it the legal way (if there is a legal way and you entitled to buy one)?...I doubt it. wrt fees: no one likes to pay more, however, I'm happy to contribute to a system that a) allows me to make my own decision whether I want an entire or de-sexed dog b) relieves the pounds from too many dumped dogs c) leads to overall less stress for dogs in the end ...regarding the current system I just pay higher fees - but I don't believe that it will have any benefit wrt item b) and c). I just don't believe that we can get an improved system that works in the end for nothing.

...usually you can't advertise an AK-47 on eBay, gumtree or over a newspaper (not so sure about Fakebook so) - obviously there are some measures in place that makes shopping for this type of goods pretty difficult. Why not applying those measures to dogs?...Ebay already doesn't allow the sales of dogs (and other pets). Once you start controlling the sales in this environment, you will get the registration numbers up. I can't see that it would make it more difficult for people that want to do the right thing - for my own dog buying experience not much would have been different, beside that I would have had to send off application papers before we bought the dog. This strategy will only push the sale of dogs underground with sellers finding other places to sell their puppies. The people that are doing the right thing are not the problem, the problem is the people who are currently doing the wrong thing as they will continue to do the wrong thing ...underground means also higher costs (higher risks, higher fines...)...which will benefit the recognized and registered breeders. If I intend to buy a dog, why should I embark on such a risky business where I can get heavily fined and have to pay eventually even more for a dog if I can get my dog without this stress the legal way? Regulation does not stop drink driving which is high risk and has high fines. Regulation does not work. ..that's debatable ...I still believe that getting reminded of the hefty fines help some people to consider a plan B. Hefty fines are nothing else than 'positive punishment', losing the licence is 'negative punishment'...a little bit keen to state on a dog forum that those methods don't work.

...usually you can't advertise an AK-47 on eBay, gumtree or over a newspaper (not so sure about Fakebook so) - obviously there are some measures in place that makes shopping for this type of goods pretty difficult. Why not applying those measures to dogs?...Ebay already doesn't allow the sales of dogs (and other pets). Once you start controlling the sales in this environment, you will get the registration numbers up. I can't see that it would make it more difficult for people that want to do the right thing - for my own dog buying experience not much would have been different, beside that I would have had to send off application papers before we bought the dog. This strategy will only push the sale of dogs underground with sellers finding other places to sell their puppies. The people that are doing the right thing are not the problem, the problem is the people who are currently doing the wrong thing as they will continue to do the wrong thing ...underground means also higher costs (higher risks, higher fines...)...which will benefit the recognized and registered breeders. If I intend to buy a dog, why should I embark on such a risky business where I can get heavily fined and have to pay eventually even more for a dog if I can get my dog without this stress the legal way? Eta: ...btw, all these arguments against an 'upfront registration' mentioned so far are also valid wrt the de-sexing strategy

...usually you can't advertise an AK-47 on eBay, gumtree or over a newspaper (not so sure about Fakebook so) - obviously there are some measures in place that makes shopping for this type of goods pretty difficult. Why not applying those measures to dogs?...Ebay already doesn't allow the sales of dogs (and other pets). Once you start controlling the sales in this environment, you will get the registration numbers up. I can't see that it would make it more difficult for people that want to do the right thing - for my own dog buying experience not much would have been different, beside that I would have had to send off application papers before we bought the dog.

...who pays for the dogs in the pounds?...we can't expect that everything is free. If such an approach would work to relieve the pounds than it should obviously also free up some money there. The biggest part should be carried by the buyer - if he buys a dog from a recognized breeder now, this breeder has to consider this work into the sales price too.

ok...a breed specific orientated consultancy of potential owners seems to require too many detailed information - how about the 'upfront registration' in general?...responsible breeders with pride in their puppies will do everything to find the right buyers, hence the chances that these puppies will end up in the pound will be significant less. And this is a significant difference to breeder who only aim for the money and who will sell their puppies to everyone as long as they see the money. The chances that these pupps will end up in the pounds seems to be therefore much higher. So by implementing a mandatory 'upfront registration' for all breeds / dogs with a reasonable waiting period we would create a buffer period in which the councils could provide the checks and consultancy that normally the responsible breeder does?...similar methodology should lead to similar results? ...the councils could even outsource this checks to recognized and authorized breeders (with the right expertise!) if the councils don't have the capacity. Eta: the suggestion should be seen in context with the currently adopted 6 month period for the official registration (for NSW): if the owner has 6 month to register the dog officially, a lot can happen in this time and the pup might be indeed surrendered to the pound before the expiration of the 6-month period.

Well forgive me for not accepting this info outright (not a fan of the RSPCA stats) but there are many variables in why dogs are dumped and why they attack......not just the breed..... No? I don't know the protocol the RSPCA adopts; I expect they asked people why they surrender the dog? ...and if a Maltese owner states that the dog shows aggression and the dog might even show this behaviour than this is what they enter in the list. I guess they just record the status quo and don't have recourses to investigate the underlying cause of unwanted behaviour.

no, as already mentioned somewhere: I'm Chuck Norris older brother - he became rich and famous and I get the belting :D

http://www.burkesbackyard.com.au/fact-sheets/pets/pet-road-tests/dog-dumpage/#.VzUcsI9OJhF the data seems to come from the RSPCA so I assume they knew what they are talking about?

This is problematic. Breeds? We can't even identify "pitbulls" - breed is a guess unless you have a pedigreed, DNA tested animal e.g I can prove who my pups' parents are who in turn are pedigreed animals. Some breeds get dumped more than others? Like some breeds bite more? You guessed it, there's nothing wrong with the breed itself, they are just more popular. I know. I've seen the data. Councils DO NOT want to spend money on dogs and cats. They just don't. you missed the context: ...this list I refer too are the dogs / breeds that are dumped more than other breeds - obviously causing the pounds more headaches than other breeds. If we know this, why not trying to address this? ....if we know that Maltese get dumped more often and we can detect dog owners interested in a Maltese upfront: that's the best timing for consultancy so the owner might rethink his/her choice. The breeds that are the most common in pounds are the breeds that are common in the community. The ones I follow have a lot of bull breeds and others I follow a lot of working breeds. Majority that I can see in one I follow are crossbreeds. Very few purebreds. I can't see this...according to your theory Maltese would be the most popular dog in Australia? ....according to the list Maltese are the most dumped breed because they show aggression and bark (in both categories they hold the first rank). Eta: the list is from 2003 so a lot might have changed now; nevertheless such statistics could be one tool to address the issue 'full pounds' instead of riding the erratic de-sexing for all dogs campaign.

This is problematic. Breeds? We can't even identify "pitbulls" - breed is a guess unless you have a pedigreed, DNA tested animal e.g I can prove who my pups' parents are who in turn are pedigreed animals. Some breeds get dumped more than others? Like some breeds bite more? You guessed it, there's nothing wrong with the breed itself, they are just more popular. I know. I've seen the data. Councils DO NOT want to spend money on dogs and cats. They just don't. you missed the context: ...this list I refer too are the dogs / breeds that are dumped more than other breeds - obviously causing the pounds more headaches than other breeds. If we know this, why not trying to address this? ....if we know that Maltese get dumped more often and we can detect dog owners interested in a Maltese upfront: that's the best timing for consultancy so the owner might rethink his/her choice.

...so if we know that some breeds get more dumped than others, how about this: if you want to become a dog owner, you have to apply for registration of the wanted breed upfront. If the breed is one that gets more dumped than others the council will provide a free consultation to inform the owner of the risks - the owner may or may not change his/her mind, but at least can make an informed decision. would this be practicable?... how long does the waiting period has to be?

http://www.burkesbackyard.com.au/fact-sheets/pets/pet-road-tests/dog-dumpage/#.VzUcsI9OJhF I provided this link before, but I just noticed something interesting: have a look at 'The 10 breeds most dumped due to aggression are' figures: if you would let people with less background knowledge guess the first ranks, it is likely that they would mention pit bull breeds first...but the stats show it is just not true! Eta: also interesting: Maremmas don't bark, are not aggressive, but are on rank 4 of the most dumped dogs!

Crap. You want inflammatory take a look at post 1. If you're worried about people being put off by the other dolers, you're looking at the wrong end of the dog. well, looking at something from a different angle is all part of a holistic in nature approach, isn't it :) ?

http://healthypets.mercola.com/sites/healthypets/archive/2011/09/06/one-two-possible-reasons-dogs-live-longer-in-europe.aspx ...listen to the broadcast ...interesting... Eta...couldn't resist, had to buy the book (Pukka's Promise: The Quest for Longer-Lived Dogs Paperback – February 4, 2014), it has a lot of excellent critics on Amazon (I bought it from evil bay so at it was a few $$ cheaper) Eta: here some Editorial Reviews “Kerasote traveled the world in search of answers to these questions, and he truly offers the reader a range of expert guidance that will be beneficial for anyone who wants to ensure that their dogs will be healthy and well.” —Seattle Post-Intelligencer “Kerasote takes nothing as gospel and nothing for granted . . . By distilling years of in-depth research on a wide array of canine health topics into a provocative, thought-provoking book, Kerasote has done us all a huge favor.” —The Bark “Every page bursts with an exceptional fusion of groundbreaking science, eye-opening facts and compassion for our canine companions. I keep going back to it as a trusted source of information and inspiration. This book is such a gift of life to all dogs.” —Judith Samson-French, DVM, founder of Dogs with No Names "This might be the most important book about dogs written in a decade. Kerasote tells us early on that Pukka means ‘first class’ in Hindi, and first-class is a perfect description of Pukka's Promise. It’s a brilliant integration of speculation, cutting-edge science and story, and will keep you up at night wanting to read more. Every dog lover needs to read this book."—Patricia B. McConnell, author of The Other End of the Leash "Here’s a dog lover who actually teaches his dog using modern training entirely: communication, observation, and now and then a clicker—not just to build a bond and a working relationship but also to create a running conversation between man and animal. This book also investigates kibble (Is it really good for dogs?) and vaccinations (Why so many? Why so often?) and other commercial pressures on our best friends’ wellbeing. What a good read."—Karen Pryor, author of Reaching the Animal Mind "Pukka’s Promise is without question the most intelligent, most comprehensive book ever written about extending the lifetimes of dogs. Not only that, but it’s riveting. After years of flawless research plus a life of valuable experience, Kerasote has produced a masterpiece that everyone should read. From pet owners to professionals such as breeders, shelter-workers, and veterinarians, those who think they already know about dogs are in for a real surprise."—Elizabeth Marshall Thomas, author of The Hidden Lives of Dogs "Ted Kerasote gently and intelligently questions our fixed notions about living with dogs. Anyone who reads Pukka’s Promise can't help but become a better dog person. I'd like it to be compulsory reading for all practicing vets and veterinary students."—Bruce Fogle, DVM, author of The Dog’s Mind "Ted Kerasote, a born storyteller, writes about dogs with singular brilliance. Pukka's Promise is great fun but is also packed with important, surprising information; with wisdom, compassion, and love."—Dean Koontz, author of A Big Little Life: A Memoir of a Joyful Dog "Ted Kerasote mixes science with love to take on the question every dog lover asks: Can I keep my dog alive longer? Pukka's Promise stirs our hopes for the future and gives us hard information for now."—Jon Katz, author of A Good Dog "At once encyclopedic and intimate—a tour de force in canine appreciation." —Kirkus (starred review) "A moving account of one man's journey to understand man's best friend inside and out... Kerasote's latest is heartbreaking, funny, and informative."—Publishers Weekly plus 345 ratings on Amazon giving 4.5 stars out of 5...

true, but what is the gain for females if you trade uterine cancer for an increase of HSA from 1.6% to 7.6% and up to 5.7% for MCT, which is nearly non-existent in intact females?...and for males the negative trade offs seem to be avoidable only if they are de-sexed when older, which raises the question: if you can manage your entire male for the first 2 years, why wouldn't you be able to manage it for the years to come?

I'm not so sure about incentives - registrations should be easier and enforced. Imagine our cars wouldn't be registered. I'm still contemplating about the numbers. Currently breeders are providing approx. 420,000 puppies (10 years average life span assumed), approx. 70,000 are from recognized and registered breeders, and considering their T&Cs I don't believe that these puppies will have a major impact on pounds. That leaves approx. 350,000 new puppies from not registered breeders that are sold / bought in a less controlled environment. The breeders aiming for profit among this group don't have a big interest to de-sex, being controlled and registered - and I can't see that the current system address their loop holes. Approx. 50,000 dogs end up in pounds - what it tells me is that even a very small group of irresponsible breeders among the ones that cater for the 350,000 puppies can have a devastating impact if they 'throw too many puppies' on the market. If this relative small group can't be tracked down and controlled, I believe the only other option is education and some kind of 'dog license' for owners (similar to a driver license or gun license)...the aim would be to increase their commitment, make them think twice before embarking on a dog ownership ...and here I believe incentives for educational accompanying measures would be well spent. You want to be a dog owner?...pass a theoretical test, spend 8 hours of voluntary work in a pound, demonstrate some practical skills in a dog trainings club...and you are ready to get you P-plate dog owner license ...verify that you do obedience training with your dog for at least 1 year and you get your full dog owner license... I agree with education but will fight you on licenses . The demand for puppies far out weighs the demand so how can you say that there are too many coming onto the market place . People - pet owners want new puppies. But how do you want owners get motivated to educate themselves?...they likely won't spend the time in a pound or for a test if they don't have to...you register the dog, you register the owner, your register that the owner is qualified. Your last sentence made me laugh...reminds me of my last 5 years: Daddy, daddy,...why can't we have a dog...everyone has a dog...yes, I will do all the required work......There is the risk, and unfortunately the easier something is available, the less it is valued.

I'm not so sure about incentives - registrations should be easier and enforced. Imagine our cars wouldn't be registered. I'm still contemplating about the numbers. Currently breeders are providing approx. 420,000 puppies (10 years average life span assumed), approx. 70,000 are from recognized and registered breeders, and considering their T&Cs I don't believe that these puppies will have a major impact on pounds. That leaves approx. 350,000 new puppies from not registered breeders that are sold / bought in a less controlled environment. The breeders aiming for profit among this group don't have a big interest to de-sex, being controlled and registered - and I can't see that the current system address their loop holes. Approx. 50,000 dogs end up in pounds - what it tells me is that even a very small group of irresponsible breeders among the ones that cater for the 350,000 puppies can have a devastating impact if they 'throw too many puppies' on the market. If this relative small group can't be tracked down and controlled, I believe the only other option is education and some kind of 'dog license' for owners (similar to a driver license or gun license)...the aim would be to increase their commitment, make them think twice before embarking on a dog ownership ...and here I believe incentives for educational accompanying measures would be well spent. You want to be a dog owner?...pass a theoretical test, spend 8 hours of voluntary work in a pound, demonstrate some practical skills in a dog trainings club...and you are ready to get you P-plate dog owner license ...verify that you do obedience training with your dog for at least 1 year and you get your full dog owner license...