asal

If you really feel they have your back up then give em the phone number of a polish breeder...now that can be positively evil unless they are very lucky. Many rabbit show judges refuse to judge the lil cuties...and they are tiny, smaller on average than the Dwarfs so ideal for the teacuppers. do I insert evil laugh here? where do I find one There you go http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_rabbit hows that for cute little bubbikins. dont notice any mention of biting though? they sure did in the 70 and 80's :D

HO my goodness.... is that Peter the Great (imp GB) ? forget what year. he was exquisite. do I mention he would take your finger off at three paces??? savage as. Definately NOT in the breed standard for Netherlands Dwarf's, although sure is in the Polish, but he and his progeny won wherever I showed him and them. that glourious red is not easy to come by either. yes RARE so add another 1,000 to the price tag surely :D having said that the good ones. I mean good temprement and they are the majority. thank goodness. maybe we should have a dwaf breeder's phone number handy for these namphs who want a teacup? probably wouldnt even notice it wasnt canine

I have had answering txt messages they cost a motsa and you are paying to educate many who dont care or listen. theres surely enough warning about teacups DO NOT EXIST FOLKS. they are not a breed nor are the majority live long enough to as my vet says. "MAKE OLD BONES" if you love your dog why want one with a short life span?????????

again another possibility, and the witness isnt talking... where is Dr Dolittle when you need him. some kids stories could be so great if they were only real....sigh

that scenario has seemed one of them to me too. the totaly mystery if thats so is where on earch was she for the 48 hours ive been calling her? You can be sure if i knew how to ask her some how some way id be doing it.

what doesnt make sense to that, is if she came home she surely would go back for them, she is a very caring mum, even at that age, she loves pups any pup's dont have to be hers either. she has never gone out the gate, ever. even now although she is going to the edge of the road, she wont step onto it let alone cross, just keeps looking at me as if to say...well now get them ? so just have to keep a posative outlook and keep looking and searching as hubby said. so far not so much as a hair has been found. so at least we know they arent dead or we sure should have found them by now. well unless as one suggested eagle. n i know that not impossible. a friend lost one of hers that way in coonabaraban. wouldnt have thought western suburbs would but theres alwasy a first time. but two?? getting a headache.... too many possibles or what iffs?

there are heaps of foxes around here thats for sure. but since ive never lost one except for the infamous cavi incident (that foxe turned out to be two legged with blue eyes) and the occasional panic stations when dog sees snake and goes for the kill? with bird mesh round the fences thats eliminated the snakes getting through. never seen a wedgie ever around this area,, pleanty of small hawks and thats it. Awful trolling through all possible scenarios and wouldnt be in this pickle if I had just done such a simple thing as check the lens ....not happy jan

Sorry, had to smile at this. That's a bummer about the camera /spider I hope you can get some information soon , and get the pups back .....the next best thing I can hope is that wherever they are they are being loved & spoiled . that is my one consolation.. I do believe they would be. whoever they are had to be, to have dropped mum back

I do but cant find where I put them. Whats even more frustrating and upsetting is I have video cameras covering all around the house and sheds that we installed after the two cavi's were stolen. Word of warning to those with survalence cameras,,,check them often for unexpected additions to the lens. the camera that would tell me what did happen where she and the pups were, we discovered has a spiderweb and its home leaf (leaf curling spider) completly obscuring the lens hadnt checked it for over a week with all this darned rain who would have thought they would be anything other than squeaky clean. Have to admit one of the reasons aside from never cry wolf if you are not sure of something that I really didnt want to post was the knowledge that to admit they are missing it would become with a percentage a blame game. This place is well known for it although is a fact of life with most forums. remember spotting someone on on another forum offering a newbie a cement shake and flame suit to cope with the abuse sustained. was assumed we left very early.. at no time did I give the time I left. what I did say was I knew we would be late home so left extra food to make sure no one would go hungry.

great memory, think that was about 6 years ago. that time it turned out to be a chap whose living it was doing break and enters and armed robberies. when arrested and the police asked him why they had taken the dogs instead of the usual targets, tv's and such, told them..."they were so friendly and kept jumping up to be picked up when I went in to do the house." cant help but wonder if they decided to come back and do a little revenge... but if that were the case somehow i very much doubt would have returned the mum. she would be wandering around campbelltown or somewhere in between. couldnt imagine they would bother returning her home...either way thats what really has me stumped.? are they somewhere near, the puppies or who has them? its just too hard to figure, even if whoever has them though they are so cute have to have them. yet have enough consience to take mum back home? pretty freaking unbelievable....house breakers go to work no where near their own stomping grounds. how many know that? depends on what you mean by "left out" they were behind my house. beind three gate's . to my knowledge and belief all but the road gate shut. or do you mean i should have had locks on all three? I usually do, but expecting the kids would be home soon, didn.t as had forgotten the key. Although I do understand the thinking. bad things dont happen to good people, they must have deserved it. went through that when the two pups dissappered too. even the people who had bought one of them when they found out it was stolen, decided i didnt deserve my dog back if i had let it be stolen in the first place and the police had to call me to not come in the door of the police station to collect her as they were waiting for me. I had to be smuggled in and out of the prisoners section for as they put it "your safety". Great EH?

could u do it and ask any to lob in here and report? i find facebook too confusing. i just cant understand how it works at all

The mums behaviour is what I have seen previously by "dumped" dogs but i didnt put two and two together because she is at HOME. She keeps going back to the one spot looking for them. maybe they went out onto the roadway and a car stopped and picked them up....but then 48 or so hours later decided they didnt want mum and for reasons i have no possible idea took her back to the same spot? which was at our gateway not realising that was her home. but why bring her back from wherever they actually live....? its doing my head in

We are in Penrith. on acerage as is the whole area around us... if she had been within earshot of me as i walked the entire neighbourhood calling her all day Tuesday I KNOW she and the pups would have come running to me. NO the mum is not back with either of the missing pups. the "other" silver/blue and tan girl pup never went missing, she was still running back and forth through the open gate asking me, where is everyone???????????? on Tuesday morning. I have been clinging to the hope they had simply gone for a fun run and decided to go into a neighbours or one of our sheds to get out of the rain, its been bucketing here for weeks and still has. It was only this morning while telling a friend that I realised, only the two small ones dissappeared not the big one? She would not have been too slow to keep up with mum no matter how fast she ran when they got out. The little boy on the other hand can only run half her speed.....so? What would you start to think might be the other option to a fun run? Hence my having waited so long to say anything public over what I thought was my fault for not shutting the gate properly even though I believe I can clearly remember shuting it properly knowing I was not going to be back home for hours that day.

Certainly been a nightmare of a week and been absoultely stumped why sister wasnt taken she is as over the top friendly as the little boy, amazingly pretty girl, then as I telling a friend about it this morning and realised She is twice the size of the two taken. so they only wanted small. although I do not consider them the ho so desired tea cup? looks like size was the factor though. OOPS forgot the obvious... Yes Chihuahua's

I am so hoping someone can spot my babies. They and their mum dissappeared on Monday 6th February, no idea what time as we didnt get home until after 9pm. I found the gate open next morning and their silver and tan sister running around asking where is mum and my brother and sister? I thought I must have not closed the gate properly on monday morning as I didnt check them before I went to bed. They are 4 months old and I had given them heaps of food knowing I wouldnt be home before dark. I spent all Tuesday searching our property, sheds and neighbours sheds calling, thinking in all this rain she and the pups must have been out playing and decided to get out of the rain somewhere else instead of comming home. no neighbours have seen them. then wednesday the plot got thicker. that morning there is there mum running back and forth at the closed gate trying to get back in??? no sign of the other two pups. she then began running to the gate and looking both ways as if to say...well now lets get my puppies. but she wouldnt go anywhere else. took her to the sheds i thought she may have been in and didnt even want to enter. took her inside and she would look at me as if to ask "why are we here?" then scoot back to the gate. took her to the neighbours sheds and got the same look. left her out all day yesterday hoping she would head for whereever they were but no . just kept going to the gate and 'waiting' they are only 3 weeks old in these photos but at least they give u and idea of their colour and markings which are I hope enough for anyone to say hey where did u get that pup. Although their colours go lighter not darker as they get older. the boy is a silver/blue, with tan on his face and white particolour longcoat. he is a pretty as they come, Has his second coat comming so does look a littlie like a odd smoothcoat at the moment as his body coat is a little short but still with pants and fluffy tail. he is exceptionally friendly ... terrible for running under and over your feet for cuddles and tummy rubs the girl is a chocoloate and tan longcoat and i KNOW she has two white toes on one hind but cant for the life of me remember if the other feet have any white toes. but she is microchipped, although i do know they can be removed. Has her second coat comming so does look a littlie like a odd smoothcoat at the moment as her body coat is a little short but still with pants and fluffy tail. real timid of anyone she doesnt know. as chalk and cheese to her brother. If u think of any forums that might be able to help. much appreciated. Im beginning to suspect they were all three taken but for some reason decided not to keep mum after all and looks very like she was dumped at the gate sometime after Wednesday morning????????????????????

unbelieviable. he had his dog by the collar. and she stuck her face right in his? his whole massage was get outa my face. with a mouth that big he could have taken her face off regardless of his ownder holding the collar...........n the dog is to be put down...not the idiot stuffing her face into his space?????????

Perhaps newbies need to be reminded firstly to don Flack or Flame Suits before entering ;) cement shake optional as well as well as directions to where these so necessary items are kept... ie which folder or section to collect them first before posting anything :D

had this evil thought of muzzles on the ho so pius ones who never make mistakes and burn so many on this forum at the stake. then wonder why the OP fled never to return, in so many instances remember a lady on one forum who offered a victum a cement shake and flame suit to survive their iniation by these unmuzzled members....

+1 Harsh. The person had a situation with the dogs & did the wrong thing. Not everyone is perfect & knows everything & the right & wrong way to handle it is variable according to whose opinion is given. Even trainers & behaviourists vary in their methods. One thing is obvious these dogs have to be living seperately. This is possible. When done with common sense lots of animals live apart in homes. Cats & birds, dogs & rabbits, dogs & chickens, cats & fish etc. Not all animals are good with each other & these 2 dogs are not either. It does sound like he will work something out so both dogs are safe & kept alive. He came on here for some support & advice & he sure has got some that makes me go you get my vote. heaps of good sense here hope the OP hasnt given up. and not comming back. how dare so many presume to judge this man. he asked for help not character assination

My brother did none of those things, when attacked by 6 greyhounds who pulled their owner off his feet and dragged him until he lost hold of their leads. when he realised they were after his shetland sheep dog he lifted her in his hands and held her the full heigh of his hands n he is nearly 6 foot himself. add the length of his arms and she was some 9 foot at least above them, they kept trying to run up his body and grab her. but kept falling back. they were muzzled so probably thats what saved her life and finally their owner got there and pulled them off. they were so excited he couldnt pull all 4 off and had to tie them one at a time to a fence and let my brother get home before he tried to lead them. i understand its actually illegal to try to lead too many greyhounds at the same time. obvious why now. so dont assume holding your ground and not running will stop such attacks either.

my goodness, what a lesson on control, notice not one of them paid attention the to the dog challenging them... then when he said they could free hurtle across the fields.. like scattered rice....on call and it was if they were magnatised chips back to his bike. who feels a tad inadequate??????? although i have had one dog i think could outdo them, he was a poodle.. think it was the brains of the doggie rather than mine. he was a one of kind that Bel Ami Picolo.

that article written by Mrs Sharp was so right. she calls them "The Incorrigibles’ " ive thought of them as the "precious ones" they forget people in glass houses shouldnt throw stones. but "they" feel they are "precious" and special because they have cupboards full of trophies and ribbons and they are there fore above and better. but do not understand, when you spread ill will it blows across all in the end.

laws and rulings have even been passed on the assumption that reining in pedigree breeders is going to somehow eliminate the unwanted genes by eliminating for example parent to progeny or brother sister matings. and line breeding discouraged. dozens of other unwanted genes remain unknown in a large proportion of the population. and will turn up regardless of whether the parents are purebred or x bred yet only the purebreeder gets the blame if it occures in their litter. all the millions of wild animals descended from a few imports to a foreign country that are now in the millions and billions are ruthless culled in the wild. thats why u dont see the unlucky ones. does it make the wild unethical or guilty? when will the guilt mongering stop and encouragement and support to irricate what no person put there and all work together for the common good? then maybe less people will hide from admiting they discovered a problem. You are so right. until the guilt mongering stops and we all work together it just fractionises everyone and slows what we all really want to achieve

here is part of one i found "1. EXPLANATION Doramectin is a member of the avermectin class of compounds, which includes abamectin and ivermectin. It is a semisynthetic avermectin that has close structural similarity to abamectin and ivermectin. It is used as an endoparasitic agent in non-lactating cattle. Doramectin was previously evaluated by the Committee at its forty-fifth meeting (Annex 1, reference 119), when it established an ADI of 0–0.5 µg/kg bw on the basis of a NOEL of 0.1 mg/kg bw per day for mydriasis in a 3-month study in dogs treated by gavage and using a safety factor of 200. An additional safety factor of 2 was applied because doramectin was not tested in CF-1 mice, which is the test animal most sensitive to the neurotoxic effects of this family of drugs. In 1997, the Joint FAO/WHO Meeting on Pesticide Residues (JMPR) concluded that the sensitivity to avermectins of CF-1 mice was due to a genetic variation that causes reduced expression of P-glycoprotein in the blood–brain barrier (FAO/WHO, 1998). The JMPR further concluded that the results of studies with CF-1 mice were not appropriate for establishing ADIs for avermectins. P-glycoprotein was expressed in the brain and jejunum of all species studied. P-glycoprotein is a cell membrane protein that acts to remove a wide variety of lipophilic compounds from cells, including avermectins. In the capillary endothelium of the central nervous system, it serves as a functional component of the blood–brain barrier. In intestinal epithelium, P-glycoprotein can limit intestinal absorption of a range of compounds. The Committee at its fiftieth meeting (Annex 1, reference 134) accepted the conclusions of the JMPR and considered that it was no longer necessary to apply an additional safety factor of 2 for avermectins and milbemycins that had not been tested in CF-1 mice. Doramectin was re-evaluated by the Committee at its present meeting in order to determine whether removal of the additional safety factor of 2 was appropriate. On the basis of the Committee’s decision taken at its fiftieth meeting, the present Committee concluded that use of an additional safety factor of 2 in establishing the ADI for doramectin was no longer necessary. No new data were provided to the Committee. The literature was reviewed for published information on the toxicity of avermectins considered relevant to this evaluation. The Committee reviewed information on the mechanism of the toxicity of ivermectin in a subpopulation of collie dogs and observations of its toxicity in a subpopulation of Murray Grey cattle. The Committee also considered a published review of the relative sensitivities of mice, rats, rabbits, dogs and non-human primates to avermectins. The relative potencies of doramectin, ivermectin and abamectin were also considered. The Committee examined information about variants of the human gene that codes for P-glycoprotein and reviewed observations in humans. 2. BIOLOGICAL DATA 2.1 Toxicological studies 2.1.1 Genetic basis for sensitivity to the toxicity of avermectins (a) Collie dogs The genetic basis for the sensitivity of collies to avermectins was studied in 13 clinically normal collies, previously identified as being sensitive or insensitive to ivermectin. Seven animals were identified as sensitive after displaying typical clinical signs of neurotoxicity, including depression, ataxia, mydriasis, salivation or drooling, after receiving a single oral dose of 120 µg/kg bw. The objective of the study was to determine whether altered gene expression of P-glycoprotein or a polymorphism of the canine Mdr1 gene that codes for P-glycoprotein exists in avermectin-sensitive collies. The sensitivity of the CF-1 mouse strain to the neurotoxic effects of avermectin has been traced to a polymorphism of the murine Mdr 1 gene resulting in decreased expression of P-glycoprotein (Umbenhauer et al., 1997). The level of Mdr1 expression was similar in sensitive and insensitive collies, as determined by semi-quantitative reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) analysis. Sequence analysis of canine Mdr1 by RT-PCR was conducted on RNA isolated from blood leukocytes obtained from the sensitive and insensitive collies and also from other breeds (one beagle, two golden retrievers and one Staffordshire terrier cross-bred dog). Sequence analysis of clones from three ivermectin-sensitive collies revealed an identical four-base pair deletion in the first 10% of the transcript. This deletion causes a frame-shift mutation resulting in the production of a truncated, non-functional protein. The same four-nucleotide deletion was detected in all samples from ivermectin-sensitive collies, which were also homozygous for the deletion. Insensitive collies had a heterozygous genotype, with one mutant allele and one wild-type allele. Blood samples from all the other breeds showed homozygosity for the wild-type. The investigators concluded that their study provided evidence that the sensitivity of collies to ivermectin results from a frame-shift deletion of four base pairs in the canine Mdr1 gene (Mealey et al., 2001). (b) Observations in Murray Grey cattle Murray Grey cattle on one farm in the central tablelands of New South Wales, Australia, were reported to be sensitive to the toxicity of avermectin B1. The first cases were noted in October 1985, in 50 Murray Grey heifers aged 18–26 months treated with avermectin B1 at an estimated dose of 175–200 µg/kg bw by injection. Three of the heifers died within 2 days of treatment. Two weeks later, 144 Murray Grey cattle aged 4–18 months and weighing 200–450 kg were treated with avermectin B1 at an estimated dose of 120–200 µg/kg bw by injection. The numbers of males and females treated were not stated. Within 48 h of treatment, three steers weighing 400–450 kg developed severe neurological signs, and all three were slaughtered for necropsy. A fourth steer in this group showed mild neurological signs and was slaughtered 19 days after treatment. A field trial was conducted on this farm with 208 Murray Grey cattle, comprising 90 steers that had been treated with avermectin B1 1–2 months earlier and a second group of 118 cattle that had not been treated previously. The animals were weighed and treated with the recommended therapeutic dose (200 mg/kg bw) or injected with the vehicle only. One steer in the group that had not been treated previously developed neurological signs 42 h after treatment and was slaughtered for necropsy. Brain, spinal cord, liver, kidney, lung, heart, spleen, intestines, skeletal muscles, adrenals, lymph nodes and peripheral nerves from the four initial cases, the case found in the field trial and one normal treated animal were examined macroscopically and histologically. No pathological changes were found that would explain the severe neurological syndromes observed. The concentrations of avermectin B1 in plasma and/or serum, liver, brain and spinal cord from the five clinically affected animals and the normal animal were assayed by high-performance liquid chromatography with fluorescence detection. The average concentration of avermectin B1a was 56 µg/ml in brain tissue from affected animals and 4 µg/ml in brain tissue from the normal animal. Two additional field trials were undertaken with Murray Grey cattle in other areas of New South Wales and in Victoria. A total of 83 cattle were treated with at least twice the normal therapeutic dose of avermectin B1. No adverse reactions occurred. The authors stated that no other incidents of toxic effects of avermectins have been reported in Murray Grey cattle. They also noted that the farm on which the adverse reactions were seen had maintained a virtually closed herd for approximately 15 years (Seaman et al., 1987). 2.1.2 Relative sensitivities of mice, rats, rabbits, dogs and non-human primates to the toxicity of avermectins The relative sensitivities of the central nervous system in mice, rats, rabbits, dogs and non-human primates to avermectins have been reviewed (Lankas & Gordon, 1989). The studies conducted with ivermectin addressed acute toxicity in mice, rats, dogs and rhesus monkeys treated orally; short-term studies of toxicity in rats, dogs and rhesus monkeys; and studies of developmental and reproductive toxicity in mice, rats and rabbits. The studies with abamectin given by oral administration comprised long-term studies of toxicity and carcinogenicity in mice and rats, a 1-year study of toxicity in dogs and a study in rhesus monkeys given single doses. The authors concluded that clear species differences exist in the sensitivity of the central nervous system to the toxicity of avermectin, rodents being the most sensitive. A dose of 0.2 mg/kg bw in mice and slightly higher doses in rats resulted in clinical signs of central nervous system toxicity, comprising tremors and ataxia, while these doses caused no adverse effects in rabbits, dogs or rhesus monkeys. The authors described a study of acute toxicity in which groups of two male and two female rhesus monkeys were given abamectin or ivermectin at single oral doses of 0.2, 0.5, 1, 2, 8, 12 or 24 mg/kg bw. The time between administration of the next higher dose to the same group of monkeys was 2–3 weeks. The authors noted that the minimum single oral dose of ivermectin or abamectin that was toxic (2 mg/kg bw) was approximately 10-fold greater than the human clinical dose of ivermectin. Emesis was the only toxic effect observed in rhesus monkeys after an oral dose of ivermectin of 2 or 8 mg/kg bw; the clinical signs of toxicity observed after a dose of 24 mg/kg bw were emesis, mydriasis and sedation. The authors compared the effect at 8 mg/kg bw with effects seen in a child (age and sex not stated) after the apparently accidental ingestion of approximately 8 mg/kg bw. The toxic effects observed in the child were emesis, mydriasis and sedation. In view of the similarity of the toxic effects observed in rhesus monkeys and the child, the authors proposed that rhesus monkeys are an appropriate model for predicting the acute toxic effects of ivermectin in humans. The NOEL for acute effects after administration of abamectin or ivermectin to rhesus monkeys was 1 mg/kg bw. The review of the developmental and reproductive toxicity of ivermectin included the results of studies conducted in mice, rats and rabbits. The reported NOELs for maternal toxicity in mice, rats and rabbits were 0.1, 5 and 3 mg/kg bw per day, respectively. The reported NOELs for developmental toxicity in mice and rabbits were 0.2 and 1.5 mg/kg bw per day, respectively. A NOEL of 0.2 mg/kg bw per day was reported for neonatal and developmental toxicity in a multigeneration study in rats (Lankas & Gordon, 1989)." this is the link to the whole article http://www.inchem.org/documents/jecfa/jecmono/v49je02.htm#2.1.1.2

thats the point. how often are we told this only happens in purebreds because they are inbred? or the breeder is unethical, either way the result is the same finger pointing and guilt directed. yet the same occurs in the so called hybrid vigour filled x breds. nothing is that black and white yet so much has been slated against purebreds when this happens in their ranks. do you understand?