Erny

Does it? If they are two different breeds then the result is a cross-breed. This is the same as a person with two same pure-breeds breeding (with all the boxes ticked) a pure bred litter but no ANKC paper?

Isn't it? The dogs would be acknowledged as "pure-breed" (ie bred pure to the standards of breed stabilisation), wouldn't they (missed the discussion). The breeder wants to register but can't because the ankc don't have a slot for them. Isn't a back-yard-breeder someone who is breeding cross-breeds and/or someone who is breeding pure-breeds but doesn't want to register them with ankc? Just because ankc doesn't have a box to put a particular pure breed of dog in, should the breeder be stigmatised with the label of byb in the general sense that byb is used? Perhaps the problem is that the term "byb" is used to describe two different things? An indiscriminate breeder of cross-breeds with no ambition to stabilise to a pure-breed, and a byb perhaps being the one who breeds pure-breeds but doesn't or can't register with ANKC, and that's why terminology gets so tangled and one is tarred with the same brush as the other? With all due respect to Troy, I tend to agree that if the rules are about what the ANKC permit, should the title of the forum be altered to reflect that, rather than have the title purport to embrace pure breeds of dogs. This of course would narrow things by precluding breeds formally recognised by other International organisations, though.

What brand did you use, WM? Email me, if you'd prefer, if you will? Pro-K9 The brand I have been using is apparently not available anymore (I need to verify that next week). The new brand available to the Health Food Store here is brighter in colour, although labelled "organic". I haven't used it yet.

That's correct. They use the whole of the flower : the petals and the stigma (the eye of the flower) are used. And hey Perse! Great tip about using the cut out bottles for soaking the length of legs if that's all that is affected! . Wouldn't want to have a squirmy dog trying to walk away whilst soaking though :laugh: . One or two legs at a time would do it nicely and easily, I'd expect :) . All 4 would make an interesting photo shot, lol.

Hi Megan - nope, no rinse. Just soak, pat/rub the coat with a towel to take out the excess from the coat but leave the tea to dry on the skin. When I do an overall bath of it for my boy, I put about 2-3 inches of very hot water in the bath tub and I put a decent hand/fist full of the tea in the toe of a stocking (which I have cut off and I knot the end) and let it bob around in the really hot water until the water cools to tepid or room temp. I then use the stocking with the tea in it in the same way as one might use a sponge to wet all of his body up. The more water you use, the more tea you'll need. To put that much water in that it needs to cover the length of Fergs' legs will take a lot, unless you do it in a small tub perhaps? My inbox is always filling up. Easiest if you send via the email option. Or direct to Pro-K9 Poor Fergs - hope the rash is soothed soon. Give him a pat for me :).

I'm sorry Donatella, but that's not a method I'd be recommending. In your instance yes, there is a fear that your pup needs help to overcome (and I'm so sorry that pup has had such a bad experience to begin with ), but the problem can come when confidence begins to build yet fear still exists. The pup (or dog, as we are talking generally) builds sufficient confidence to approach and take the treat from baby, but if baby moves unexpectedly the reflex reaction from the pup/dog could be a snap with the teeth. The other problem that could result is a pup or dog who believes babies = treats from them. This can result in the pup or dog learning to become too expectant/excited/pushy towards a baby whenever the baby (or any other) is present. In my opinion, the treat should come from you and the baby should not be left alone as the one to deliver it. For the OP, we're not talking about existing learnt fear, but I would be inclined to work in a similar framework as what I've written in my earlier post as the result you want is a calm dog around babies and not one where the dog expects anything. Think forward to what the result could possibly become and work now to train for how you want your pup to be as an adult towards babies. I agree that you have a strong negative to try to rebalance to a "0", but I'd be careful about putting that in the hands of a baby.

The quicker you apply, the quicker it will have effect and the better effect it will be. You should notice improvement inside 12 - 24 hours (from my experience) and quite often immediately in terms of dog not paying as much attention to it.

I rush for the Calendula, first step, rather than cortisone. I always keep Calendula in supply in my cupboard for the "just in case I need it" times, and it's there for me to treat something as soon as I spot it. How is Fergs today?

Give a good soaking wet down/wash with Calendula Tea. You might even find you don't need to rush to the Vets if the redness/angriness of the skin recedes. Keep repeating the washes or at least "wash spots" until the skin has healed. And then watch to see if the problem recurs.

I'd be inclined to simply have your dog in a crate (assuming crate-trained). Give her a treat for being in there. Greet your family member and toddler and effectively ignore worrying about your dog save for YOU giving her a treat here and there throughout the visit, providing she is calm in the crate. Have the toddler leave your dog well alone as well. If the visit is short, I'd leave it at that and let your dog out of the crate once the toddler has left. Phase 1 - Children are no big deal. This step can repeated over and over at visits and when appropriate, you could then bring your dog out on lead, to come over and simply sit/lay on her mat. Have the toddler leave your dog alone. Phase 2 - Children are no big deal, even when (dog) is not in the crate. Go from there, each step ONLY proceeding if your dog is calm. Avoid making the focus of visits about the dog and child interacting. In the meantime, get your dog used to having her tail and ears pulled (within reason). Reward her with a treat when you apply pressure (including grabbing hold of coat and also the collar). This will get her more used to the sensation than she otherwise might be. If the toddler cries, call your dog to you first (provided the crying isn't because the toddler is hurt or in need of immediate urgent attention) and give your dog a reward. Then attend the child. Repeating this whenever the opportunity presents itself teaches the dog that when a child cries a treat is on offer from you and will have the resultant effect of the dog coming to you rather than rushing over to the child.

Staph is generally on the skin - but doesn't it normally infect when the skin becomes irritated and allows the staph to get in and/or if the immune system is compromised? If that's the case, then the staph would be a secondary infection. The original cause of skin infection, if it still exists, would need to be discovered, wouldn't it?

Only one person that I know of (a DOL Member, as it happens) has experienced the issue of white coat staining yellow. But when I sent her a sample of the brand I use, this problem did not occur. We believe that the brand of Calendula Tea she purchased might have contained colour enhancement (presumably to make it look nicer to the eye).

In my experience, narrowing the source of the allergic reaction is not something that can often be successfully achieved quickly and easily . It is usually a matter of elimination. There are allergy tests they can do (similar to what they do with humans - i.e. skin tests). I don't know how much those cost though as I've never done that with my boy, nor do I know how reliable they are. The first step I would take would be to do a trial and error of my own, especially if there could be something obvious like (in your instance, for example) putting up a barrier to the suspect plant and/or garden fertiliser and then see if the allergic reaction ceases ...... and then perhaps see if it returns when your dog is exposed to it again. That could point you in the right direction without the necessity for expensive or complex allergy testing. If that doesn't change things, then it points you to looking beyond what you first expected. Using the calendula tea to soothe the skin (it has natural anti-inflammatory and anti-bacterial qualities which help to not only soothe but also to help calm the skin so that secondary skin infections might be avoided) in the meantime. I like to look a bit further into allergies too. Not just looking at WHAT causes the allergy, but if it is something that a dog's system should normally be able to tolerate, WHY can't the dog tolerate it? And that normally leads to looking into things that support the system, allowing it to function at its most optimum. And this includes diet.

The photo is too blurry for me to see properly. But I'd go the "Calendula Tea" route rather than a shampoo route. The fact that her skin is pink is good enough reason to stop, IMO. Even if it was because of a coloration via the shampoo, which, unless it contains iodine (??), which might answer to the white coat becoming yellow, shouldn't be happening. And don't forget that the topical treatments don't cure. If the cause for the rash remains, the topical treatment will only help sooth the symptom.

Ok - you asked for it, :laugh: ...... I realise that - and in effect that means that any of the strains not vaccinated for or to which the dog has not been exposed to and/or recovered from, there is no immunity. IE The body has no forward preparedness to fight off the disease and the body is more heavily taxed as it develops the antibodies needed to do so. Becoming immune doesn't mean the disease cannot invade/enter the body. It means (to me, at least) that the body is already prepared to stave off the disease it has been exposed to and to fight off infections. It depends on what the disease is, the severity and the strain, but with immunity to specific disease (including "disease strain") there is the ability for the body to fight off the disease without exhibition of symptoms. Because perhaps your dogs have been previously exposed to Canine Cough in the past and developed a natural immunity? I'm not sure how this question relates to "Immune is immune" though, which is what I am presuming your post was responding to. I like musings. They let you wonder and ponder and meander backwards and forwards until you can draw your own conclusions, inclinations etc. :) IMO, no-one is ever "the gospel" in an 'absolute' sense. But I do know there are people who I think have the highest understanding based on sound knowledge, experience and research of a particular topic and until someone tops them, they are for me "the gospel" for the information currently available. To me, Dr Jean Dodds is one of those . I'm not closed-minded to the arguments or debates by people who don't carry the same view, but they need to be as convincing (with factual researched support) as the one I believe in. I don't think I'm following ...... ETA: And I'm still not sure how what you wrote in your post raises a question about the idea of "Immunity is Immunity"

I agree, Huski. It takes less to apply the correction and therefore I find owners are able to cope with them more easily. Given that there is no recorded evidence of harm, I'd even go further and suggest they were low risk. Yet as I mentioned, that's not the case for some of the other more widely accepted and embraced training tools. The collar was easily banned because people gasped in horror at the LOOK of it. Gross assumption. But of course, the RSPCA said it should be banned, so ..............

I agree. To be honest, because of the potential for misuse, I'd never actually recommend a prong to someone who hadn't gone to see a behaviourist first for training in its use. I don't recommend any corrective tool to anyone if they're likely to abuse it through gross mishandling. I think education (at least some basics) should be mandatory for anyone taking up the use of corrective tools, but it always seems to be the PPCollar that is the highlight of this suggestion. What about the head-collar use, for example? Also, people do have the tendency to think PPCollars are only about "control" and generally think of them as only for the stronger large breed dogs. I don't agree with this. A 'bang' or pulling on the end of the lead attached to a flat collar can do some harm and jerk the bones of a neck around for them too.

Reasons for use vary. The dog. The exercise being trained for (or against). The blunt prongs are shaped/bent in such a way that when leash tension is activated, the links of the collar move in such a fashion that the prongs squeeze in towards each other. More a side-ways movement. This causes a pinch on the skin. The skin is an organ that is well-endowed with nerve endings. Nature made it that way as what's the point of feeling things so minutely and quickly once something has gone beyond skin and struck upon vital organs? The skin is our source of the "touch and feel" sensation. The PPCollar makes use of this and it means that a lesser correction achieves a greater impact from the point of view of what the animal feels - rather than a greater impact with potential damage to muscle and skeletal accompanying the correction. This makes a corrective message vastly clearer to the dog as well and with clearer messages dogs learn faster. They learn faster, means less corrections than it might receive via some other forms of training restraints and tools. Also, because of the above, the handler can 'talk' through the leash more quietly (ie with the least of body movement and effort) and this in itself helps in training. Excessive movement can send a signal to a dog contrary to the one we intend, and/or it can be a distraction. That the use of the PPCollar has been banned in Victoria is a crying shame and the fact that it was banned WITHOUT any evidence of harm being recorded (this isn't so for the tools so widely embraced and heralded by some orgs such as RSPCA and APDT) only points to it being for political reasons. IMO.

Like all equipment, one should learn about it before judging it. Many people blindly use the head-collar without any thought to learning about it and getting some tuition in its use - but it looks nice and soft, so it would be, wouldn't it. Nup.

Looking for friend who is in VIC.... Stainless steel would only really be beneficial if you are using it around water all the time.... I don't like chrome plated stuff. Over time it chips off and can irritate skin. Go the quality stuff. I haven't read the posts in this thread but no, they are not banned Australia wide. In Victoria their use is banned. Political stunt to ban them, if you ask me - certainly not based in any sound reasoning of evidence.

I guess the results are what the laboratories who run the tests gather - they're merely passing them on. I think there is some interest in them, as it does seem to indicate whether there has been 'recent' exposure or not. More importantly, I think, if the titre is done in 2 weeks after a (eg first and/or second) vaccination, it would reveal the success of sero-conversion. I'm with Steve - if I know the immunity is there, I wouldn't re-vaccinate over.

This is the part I either don't understand, or think we often misunderstand. To me, immunity is immunity. Doesn't immunity mean the body recognises the disease and therefore has the anti-bodies (or, as time and low or no exposure goes by, the "memory" of the antibodies) in preparedness to combat the introduction of the disease should the dog contract it? Is there really such a thing as "more immune" or "higher immunity"? I don't think so - not how I understand it. You're either immune or not immune, no? This question not directed to you specifically or inparticular, SnT - just using your quote as the example of what I'm referring to :).

F10 Wash, from the Vets, is what I would think to use.

What's the procedure discomfort and recovery time for each? Assuming you have the money for it, I'd be inclined to try to save the sight - provided the pain/discomfort level of the procedure to do so didn't weigh too heavily when put up against the other option of having the eye removed. But one way or the other I guess, if you went in for the "saving sight" , you'd need to go in with the attitude of being willing to risk the $$$ for the sake of chance. It's a tough choice. It is similar (although different health problem) to one I had to face years ago with my girl "Kal" (bhcs). However that choice was taken out of my hands when other complications occurred. Good luck with whatever you choose. Either way, you're looking after your dog and I don't think any decision you make is a wrong one.