Prydenjoy

Thanks angelsun. I'm considering running on all of the suitable pups until 6 months of age or so to get an estimate of size before choosing one to keep. But then I have to consider that the homes they go to wont get them as a puppy and that will be quite unfortunate in itself. I know that sometimes a bigger pup is not necessarily the biggest as an adult. Seeing as bitches are usually smaller than dogs I'm thinking that if I keep a bitch from the litter, and if the litter turns out quite large she should still be within the standard and I can breed her to a size reducer in the next generation. First and foremost I want to be breeding healthy pups with a good temperament, and I'll work on the finer details such as size as I go along.

Thanks heaps for that. I suppose (theoretically at least) if I wait until Mango is fully matured, if she is light, small and dainty then it would probably be less risky to breed her to a larger dog (I'm assuming the size genetics I studied at uni probably have some relevance to dogs as well). Because my breeding plan does not allow me to have too many dogs at home (I'm not set up for it) I would probably go backwards from what you said, perfecting the small and dainty, then adding in a larger dog with other qualities that I like and hope for something in the middle. In the meantime that dog may have some promising offspring that share his desirable qualities but are a little bit smaller than he is. I don't particularly want to skip a generation and not show it as I only have one bitch of my own that I am showing now! Ah so much to think about, I was up half the night thinking of my "breeding plan" and little Mango is not even a year old yet Beautiful dogs by the way, especially the bottom one!

I've heard that if you outbreed you'll often end up with pups bigger than both of the parents, but wouldn't it be the case that you're just as likely to get pups smaller than both of the parents? And others that are somewhere in between? Is it risky business outcrossing with a dog on the upper limit of the standard? Or even a dog whose parent was on the upper limit of the standard?

Well, that was about 5 years ago now and she's still going strong. She had a lot of anxiety issues though and never settled into my busy lifestyle so I sent her off to live with a lovely lady out of town. She's happy there, although still a little neurotic apparently I have a boy now though who is staying with me while I get some experience showing him and he is amazing, so friendly, settled into my lifestyle so easily - Even with my energetic and over loving toddler. My suggestion would be to get a dog on trial and see how it works out for a week or two before committing to anything, particularly with adult dogs they don't always fit into a lifestyle, and especially if they aren't used to anything but being kenneled.

I got a 5 year old retired bitch once, I looked at the websites (on this forum in the breed pages) and found the ones I liked the looks of and just asked if they had or knew of any older dogs for sale.

Sandra you took the words out of my mouth! I met a PWD at my last dog show and it took my breath away, amazing dog! Just a side note, smooth hair does NOT mean minimal shedding, mums chi x sheds more than her Poodle x + my 4 Papillons combined! I'd suggest a pap if they weren't so small

Really? I'm paranoid

Thanks for the tips, she doesn't even seem to be swollen anymore. I've had a good look on several occasions, gently parting as BL describes but nothing. Could I have been imagining? Or do some dogs swell and go down a few times before they actually come into season?

Well I've been checking her when she first wakes up before she cleans herself, perhaps she's just not a big bleeder? Rocky doesn't seem to be taking any notice of her whatsoever. Do the dogs usually sniff the bitches frequently when they are in season? I'm beginning to wonder whether I got it wrong altogether, she isn't all that swollen, just a bit, so perhaps I was wrong?

So if there's swelling, but no blood yet, it should be ok until there is blood, then separate them immediately? I've had them separate to err on the side of caution, but if they can play together for a few more days until there is blood it would be good. Or do some dogs not bleed obviously?

Thanks heaps Rommi, that is very helpful!! There is no blood yet, but they are already separated. This is actually the first time I've had a bitch in season (since our first dog had one season about 15 years ago), so I'm all pretty new to this. We all have to start somewhere! I have a dog run in the back yard, covered in shade cloth (so no accidents can happen through the wire), and solid baby gates and crates etc in the house to keep them separate if they are inside (the boy wears a nappy anyway as he is on an extended holiday here and is a marker, of course I wouldn't rely on that though!). I'm not worried about an accident.

My sister is a vet nurse and doesn't like halti's due to seeing dogs with corneal ulcers resulting from the dogs scratching to get it off their head. The dog MUST be counter conditioned to enjoy the halter being on their head, once that is done it is a marvelous device that can give people the ability to walk their dogs, who otherwise wouldn't be able to leave the house with them. I would be more likely to recommend a front clip harness because they are simply easier for most people, as they do not require so much "ground work" to get the dog to accept them. If the dog is already accepting the head halter I'd say stick with it, don't fix what isn't broken.

Is it swelling, then blood, then more swelling and mating time, then what? I just noticed Mango's "bits" are a little swollen, but no blood. Will she bleed soon? Or have I missed something? I have an intact male living here at the moment, how long should I keep them apart?

MDBA have some really great sounding courses, I'm sure their nutrition courses would be wonderful (judging by some of the knowledge on nutrition exhibited by some people on this board, I assume they have something to do with the course content?) Otherwise go to http://www.casinstitute.com/ - They have some amazing courses, quite detailed too if you're into that

I might know what you meant, but I'd probably grab the flat collar For me a training collar is a flat collar, because that is what I train with - No need for anything else

Free samples? Might have to email them! Dry food only makes up a very small portion of my dogs diet, but I've always loved Eagle Pack. Just can't buy it here, got to order it over the net. Samples would be good to help determine if the doggies like it and which one to get...

No one here, was brought up in a meeting I was at, one of the ladies said she calls them "training collars" now because thats what they are, since then I've heard it used a few times. No one in the class had a martingale or prong collar, just check chains but they are being referred to as "training collar".

I always call them check chains, but when I hear people referring to them as "training collars" to avoid the negative association with "check chain" I think it's pushing it too far. It is what it is, no matter what label you put on it it is still the same piece of equipment.

I was having a laugh about that the other day with a friend, it's gone from a choke or strangle collar, to a check chain to a correction collar, when people start feeling bad about this name I'd like to know what they'll change it to next Not intended to make the OP feel bad, at the end of the day the device is still the same, you'll either feel bad about it or not, changing the name wont change your feelings

I generally spend a lot more time explaining the technical terms etc to people before I actually use them, in this case I didn't think it was necessary as I (wrongly) assumed that people here had an understanding of them. Settle down, there is no place for this sort of reasoned, logical thinking in a thread about NDTF vs DELTA!!!!

When I write a post how am I to know that a word I use has been mis interpreted by certain people? I guess I could have been more technical and typed in "positive punishment" every single time but when in a hurry I tend to abbreviate. So using an aversive is not positively punishing a behavior? Punishment is only when you get home hours after the deed and yell at the dog? Well, in fact by definition that is not punishment at all because it is hardly reducing the behavior when the dog doesn't even know what it is in trouble for. So sorry if I said one thing and you took it as a completely opposite thing and that offended you, though that is through no fault of my own.

Sorry, when I used the word punishment I thought that the people reading this topic were educated enough to know what the word punishment ACTUALLY means. My mistake, sorry if I offended anyone!!

All I'm saying is that there is room in this world for all types of trainers, so why slam positive trainers and give them a bad rap simply because they don't use punishment? Seems incredibly ignorant and closed minded to me!! Trainers who use punishment are the first to get up on their high horses when a positive trainer suggests that there is something inherently wrong with using punishers, but EVERY SINGLE ONE OF YOU is doing EXACTLY the same in regards to people who just use positives, seems a bit hypocritical, no? I've suggested we just let bygons be bygons, let positive trainers become the best they can, and refer on if needs be, and to let the balanced trainers do what they are doing so that there IS someone to refer on to in the case that we don't want to inflict punishment onto the dogs on a regular basis (I think nearly every positive trainer will use punishment at some time in some form but it is not the basis of our training). But that isn't good enough, it seems we all have to have the same values and method of training or someone here will make out that you are ignorant based on the fact that you don't use "all 4 quantrants" - Well I will tell you one thing, to use positive methods effectively you need a hell of a lot more knowledge about what motivates dogs and how to tackle an issue than to just give the dog a quick punishment and problem gone! So just think of that next time someone is devoting their time to learning positive methods, there is so much to learn perhaps we don't want to waste our time learning to use punishment when there are so many others out there quite happy to use it if you ever want to refer on (not to mention so much to read on the reasons why not to use punishment, I'd rather be reading up on that than reading up on the punishments you can use and how to use them). So if everyone can stop being so hypocritical, no one here has called you cruel or said anything nasty about you just because of the methods you use, we've acknowledged your place in society so I think perhaps it is time for you to jump down off that horse and admit that people devoting all of their time to learning positives and doing great things with dogs as a result also have a place in society. But I know what will happen, everyone will just pull the bits out of this post where I have commented on why I don't use punishers etc and tear it to shreds, instead of seeing the deeper meaning of this post... It's happened a few times already when I've tried to "call a truce"

Hmm... So it's ok for a med student to specialise in brain surgery, or a psychologist to specialise in mental health, but it's not ok for a dog trainer to specialise in positive methods? Go figure. So it's to no ones benefit that there are people out there that strive to get the best out of dogs using the most positive and motivational methods out there, and giving it their absolute best shot to find methods that work without the use of punishers? So we should all be punishing our dogs, regardless of what dog we own - Because without those people specialising in positive methods there would be no way we would be able to find anything positive that works, because we'd just have punishment to fall back on all of the time. Right, I get it. Lets all be clones and do as everyone else is doing, forget about science, forget about diversity, lets just train the way dogs have always been trained because it's so wrong to think outside the square. Without exceptional motivational trainers that devote their lives to specialising in one area we wouldn't have some of the wonderfully trained dogs we have today, such as the one that did oh so well at the Royal this year. Clearly PP worked, but without those people devoting their lives to learning the ins and outs of the method and revolutionising dog training our dogs would all just be trained the same way as they always have been and otherwise always would be.

I did suggest this in another thread to those who have rubbished particular Delta trainers, but they seem more content to rubbish them on a public forum than to actually do something about it (ignorance is bliss yeah?). Seeing as staff n toller is the only one here actually DOING the course I think she is the only one who can comment on what Delta do and don't teach. So all this rubbish about them denying that there is any other way of training is clearly just made up and therefore not even relevent to the conversation. So NDTF teaches all 4 quadrants, Delta teaches about all 4 quadrants and educates people of alternate ways to teach dogs. There, we have the answer. So which course you take up depends on which style you want to teach, as the OP was saying they are from a positive club, if this is the direction they wish to follow then perhaps Delta (or CASI, if "nationally accredited" is not the be all and end of for them) may be the way to go