j

In the ACT, there is a defence for a dog attacking a person or animal - however it appears that it is only if it attacks a person on their own property 50 Offences of attacking or harassing (1) A carer with a dog must not, without reasonable excuse, allow the dog to attack or harass a person or animal. Maximum penalty: 50 penalty units. (2) The keeper of a dog commits an offence if the dog attacks or harasses a person or animal when it is not with a carer. Maximum penalty: 50 penalty units. (3) In a prosecution for an offence against subsection (2), it is a defence if— (a) the defendant establishes that the person or animal provoked the dog; or (b) the person or animal was attacked or harassed because the dog came to the aid of its keeper, or another person or animal that the dog could reasonably be expected to protect; or © if the attack or harassment was on premises occupied by the defendant, the defendant establishes that— (i) the person was on the premises without reasonable excuse; or (ii) the person failed to take reasonable care for the person’s own safety.

He looks like a blow up toy with all the air let out :laugh:

You may want to ask for this to be put in Health/Nutrition/Grooming Sorry, I can't help with your question, I've never had an animal eat rat bait (well, not one that wasn't meant to)

My boy does it. He very rarely barks at anything, so it's odd to hear him do it. The fact that it is a full on, loud and big howl from a 7kg dog is pretty amazing too. You would swear it was a big breed dog if you heard it and didn't see him.

Do you still have your other little dog? Do you know what she is like with other dogs?

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/killing-someone-on-accused-teens-bucket-list-20120222-1tmx4.html Update on court appearance

More in this report http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/killing-someone-on-accused-teens-bucket-list-20120222-1tmx4.html

A friend of mine vacuumed up spilt beans and set their vacuum cleaner on fire. Not a good move

Where are you? I am in Queanbeyan. Maree CPR .

I've just cleaned out my linen closet and have two bags of hand towels, face washers and sheets which could be useful to rescue/breeders. Sheets are a mix of sizes, both fitted and flat. Too heavy to post, so on offer to act area. Please remove

Both my SILs are Kiwis. I just hadn't paid much attention to where a lot of people on here are from before

Reading this has made me realise we have a lot more NZ members than I knew about

Is Malaseb only for bacterial/fungal type conditions? Or is it useful for general itchiness? My boy is quite itchy this year - pretty sure it is an allergy to something in the garden (haven't worked out what). He has been flea treated and all his bedding washed, just in case, but I haven't actually seen any evidence of fleas on him. He generally has off white/cream coat, but his feet, chest and under his tail appear to have red staining (all the areas that would touch the ground when laying and sitting down) I have malaseb already (other dog had a yeasty infection previously), and was wondering if it would be useful in this situation? I also have aloveen shampoo and conditioner. I will be taking him to the vet next week anyway, as he and the cats are due for vaccinations, so I will be getting his skin checked out but in the meantime, thought I might give him a bath to try and give him some comfort

Yes me too.........infact I would like to see a law here that ALL cats and dogs should be vaccinated and microchipped before being advertised for sale or incur a hefty fine .......it may put some people off if they have to pay out before they can make money from sale of pups and kittens . There is legislation in the ACT requiring dogs to be microchipped if sold ... 84 Identification of dogs and cats—requirement (1) A person commits an offence if— (a) the person keeps a dog or cat; and (b) the dog or cat is required to be identified by a regulation made for section 83; and © the dog or cat is not identified as required by the regulation. Maximum penalty: 5 penalty units. Dogs and cats Part 3 Section 84 (2) A person commits an offence if— (a) the person sells a dog or cat; and (b) the dog or cat, after the sale, is required to be identified by a regulation made for section 83; and © the dog or cat is not identified as required by the regulation. Maximum penalty: 5 penalty units. (3) An offence against this section is a strict liability offence. And the regulation 7 How dogs must be identified—Act, s 83 (1) A registered dog must be identified by a tag attached to a collar worn by the dog. (2) The tag must be the dog’s registration tag or another tag that shows the dog’s registration number. (3) A dog must also be identified by an identifying microchip if the dog— (a) is at least 12 weeks old; or (b) has been sold; or © is a dangerous dog. (4) The identifying microchip must— (a) be implanted in the dog; and (b) contain a number (the unique identification number) by which the identification particulars for the dog can be worked out; and © function properly. (5) The identification particulars for a dog are— (a) the following information about the dog: (i) the dog’s breed; (ii) the dog’s date of birth or age; (iii) the dog’s colour; (iv) the dog’s sex; (v) the dog’s reproductive status; (vi) the address where the dog is, or is to be, kept; (vii) the unique identification number of the identifying microchip implanted in the dog; (viii) the identification number of any other microchip implanted in the dog; (ix) the name and business address of the person who implanted the identifying microchip mentioned in subparagraph (vii) and the date it was implanted; (x) whether the dog is a dangerous dog; and (b) the following information about the dog’s owner: (i) the owner’s name and home address and, if different, postal address; (ii) a contact telephone number for the owner; and © the name of a person (other than the owner) who can be contacted in relation to the dog and a contact telephone number for the person. (6) However, subsection (3) does not apply to a dog if— (a) the dog is less than 6 months old; and (b) a veterinary surgeon certified in writing, before the dog was 12 weeks old or first sold (whichever is the earlier), that identification of the dog by identifying microchip would be a serious health risk to the dog. I can tell you now though, it doesn't stop people selling pups without microchips, and unless the purchaser of the pup makes a complaint, how can it be investigated? I'm sure someone can tell you in more detail, but my observation of the DAS site is that the common occupants are Staffy (and their crosses) Jack Russells (and their crosses) and working dogs.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/news/local/news/general/dina-wouldnt-hurt-a-hair-on-a-bunnys-head/2390663.aspx (make sure you go to the link above, cute photos) Dina wouldn't hurt a hair on a bunny's head BY MEGAN DOHERTY, CITY REPORTER 13 Dec, 2011 04:00 AM Renowned dog handler Steve Austin says his spaniels know not to hurt the rabbits or hares they flush out. Mr Austin, who was working in Canberra yesterday, said the role of his four springer spaniels was only to detect the rabbits and hares or their warrens in the Mulligans Flat Woodland Sanctuary - it was then up to officers to shoot or gas them. ''None of these dogs will touch an animal. They're not allowed to,'' he said. ''It's extremely important to understand the dog's job is to find the rabbits and it's the humans' job to kill them under the correct rules and regulations.'' Mr Austin, who was hunting cane toads with his dogs near Sydney last week also used them to help reduce the rabbit population on Macquarie Island, working among seals and penguins. ''The dogs will find a rabbit sitting right next to a seal or penguin, and I mean literally, right next to them, and they won't go near the seal or penguin,'' he said. The ACT Government is aiming to make the Mulligans Flat Woodland Sanctuary free of feral animals. It has already removed all foxes and cats through poisoning. Territory and Municipal Services says about 80 per cent of the rabbit and hare population has been removed from the sanctuary through shooting, poisoning or gassing. But small pockets remain. Mulligans Flat Board of Management chairman Professor Tony Peacock said the remaining rabbits and hares had to be removed ahead of the proposed release of the Eastern Bettong to the sanctuary next autumn. The rabbits' grazing resulted in the loss of vegetation, while their burrows caused erosion. But Professor Peacock acknowledged it was still a difficult job to remove the animals. ''No one enjoys killing animals but in this case you can have the rabbits and hares or you can have the bettongs,'' he said. Bettongs, a small rat-like native marsupial, were once common in the Canberra region but had been extinct on the Australian mainland for about 80 years and are now confined to Tasmania. Professor Peacock said bettongs were being bred at Tidbinbilla for release into Mulligans Flat while others would be brought in from Tasmania. The bettongs foraged in the vegetation and encouraged the growth of fungi which they ate. Rabbits and hares competed for that same vegetation. The ACT Government erected a two-metre high fence around the sanctuary in 2009 to create a predator-free environment across 470ha of of yellow box-Blakely's red gum grassy woodland. Professor Peacock said the aim was to introduce other native species to the sanctuary including the threatened New Holland mouse and a large wallaby. ''It's not just a fence where we throw a few animals in like a zoo - they are animals that are important to that particular ecosystem,'' he said. Professor Peacock was confident the cat and fox populations had been removed from the sanctuary, with camera and sand traps showing no evidence of them. The Mulligans Flat Woodland Sanctuary will be closed to the public this week.

I've just come home from a visit to the States and the people I was staying with were telling me all sorts of things about their dogs. By far the majority of people keep their dogs as indoor dogs. But you need to remember that there is also a much higher incidence of apartment living over there. Dogs also seem to be much better received there than they are here. I saw lots of dogs in airports and train stations and being carried in shopping centres. There are water bowls at most outside cafes. The reason for keeping them inside while nobody was home (at least in the state I was in) was largely related to weather (freezing snowy conditions) and other animals. Racoons, skunks, bobcats and lynx. Aside from the obvious prey concerns, these animals also carry rabies, which is something we don't even have to consider. They also had quite a few venomous snakes in the area I was in, which is something that we do have to consider. Personally, my dogs have always been put outside during the day from the time they were quite young. They have access to food, water and various forms of shelter. I don't think my dogs are poorly treated.

I love the sheltie with the long forelock and the dog drinking from the glass bowl

At least it's all neatly contained to his bed

I wonder how long he waited to see if it had actually been abandoned by Mum? She may have just been off feeding, which they do for very long periods of time

Hopefully there will be a new enforceable code of conduct that will address this in the nearish future...

I have updated the first post, with the response from the ACT Government in todays paper

Does anyone from any of the ACT rescue groups remember this dog? Just interested to know if it did actually come from DAS. There are photos on the link to the story

I'm not usually one to criticise RSPCA ACT, but on this occasion, I think Michael Linke is just pushing the political barrow. In order to keep their shelter "no kill" stats, they transfer dogs to DAS that they are unable to rehome. Sure, they may not deliberately release dogs to the Services, but in many cases, these are dogs that will not be sucessfully rehomed elsewhere. There are no guarantees when ANY dog is rehomed that it won't be treated cruelly, run over or neglected. For the most part, dogs that work in the service love the work and are treated as well, if not better, than many family pets. RIP Lucky AND Sergeant Todd Langley, who is basically forgotten in this story.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/news/local/news/general/war-dogs-death-draws-rspca-ire/2260887.aspx War dog's death draws RSPCA ire BY CHRISTOPHER KNAUS 17 Aug, 2011 04:00 AM The probable death of a bomb detector dog in Afghanistan has sparked heated criticism of the ACT Government, after it was revealed Domestic Animal Services released the animal to Defence last year. Lucky, a specially trained golden labrador, broke away from a Special Forces unit during a fire fight in Helmand Province on July 4. Small arms and rocket propelled grenade fire had prevented soldiers from retrieving Lucky, and the Defence Force mounted a concerted campaign to locate the dog. Lucky has still not been found more than a month after the battle and Defence confirmed yesterday they believed the labrador was probably killed in the fighting. It was yesterday revealed to the The Canberra Times that Lucky was originally from Canberra and had been kept in the pound before being given by Domestic Animal Services to Defence in July 2010. The RSPCA has delivered a sharp rebuke to the ACT Government for intentionally putting Lucky into harm's way. RSPCA ACT chief executive officer Michael Linke said it was ''totally inappropriate'' for a pound to be releasing dogs into an environment where they could be hurt or killed. ''We would hope that the pound and the Government immediately review its policy on this, and bring it into line with the RSPCA policy,'' Mr Linke said. ''We won't home dogs into police combat situations, or military combat situations or bomb detector [roles]. We don't believe that governments and pounds should be doing that either.'' The fire fight in which Lucky was lost also caused the death of Sergeant Todd Langley. The Defence department delayed announcing Lucky's disappearance and probable death until it exhausted all avenues in searching for him, including offering a reward in the local area. The local Government responds to yesterdays article http://www.canberratimes.com.au/news/local/news/general/govt-backs-decision-to-give-lucky-up/2262435.aspx Govt backs decision to give Lucky up BY CHRISTOPHER KNAUS 18 Aug, 2011 09:16 AM The ACT Government has defended giving to Defence a stray Canberra dog who has died in an Afghan war zone, saying the alternative would have been to put it down. Lucky, a specially trained golden retriever/Labrador cross, was lost after a firefight between special forces units and insurgents in Helmand Province on July 4. The special forces unit was unable to retrieve Lucky amid heavy enemy fire. Defence confirmed on Tuesday that it had been unable to locate Lucky and it believed the dog had died. Lucky was a stray dog kept in the ACT pound, before being given to Defence by Domestic Animal Services in July 2010. Territory and Municipal Services Minister Simon Corbell said the Defence Force provided extremely good care for the animals. ''They get great levels of attention,'' Mr Corbell said. ''They get training, they get great food, constant companionship from humans, and there's an enormous amount of love and care.'' Mr Corbell believed he would have been put down if he had stayed at the pound. ''This dog would have been euthanised,'' he said. ''It's wrong to suggest that dogs should not be housed with the defence force.'' The ACT chief for the RSPCA, Michael Linke, urged the Government to follow his organisation's policy of not releasing animals into environments where they may come to harm. Mr Corbell said the policy of the Government was to give dogs into loving homes.

Please have a look at the link, he is a gorgeous looking dog http://www.canberratimes.com.au/news/local/news/general/afghan-life-a-dog-fight/2250520.aspx Afghan life a dog fight KERRIE ARMSTRONG 07 Aug, 2011 12:00 AM THEY SAY cats have nine lives, but on the streets of Afghanistan, dogs do too. Wylie has used up several of his lives. It is only through the efforts of Australian Federal Police agent, Narelle Jensz, who arrived in the Middle East from Gundaroo, 30km from Canberra, that he has an opportunity to keep what he has left. He was captured by locals and forced to take part in a dog fight that nearly killed him. He had his ears, tail and penis cut off, his muzzle slashed open and he was thrown in front of a car. British soldiers managed to rescue him and bring him to the Gundaroo agent at the Kandahar Air Field, who had been using her veterinary science skills to nurse injured Afghan dogs back to health. With the help of Australian and US army medical staff, she cleaned and stitched his wounds and brought him back to life. And then she decided to bring Wylie, aged between four and five years, home. "Wylie has the ability to win you over without even trying," Ms Jensz said. "For a dog who has endured so much at the hand of humans, there is no malice or aggression, just forgiveness. He is a survivor". Ms Jensz said she had seen and felt the effect Wylie had on soldiers serving in an unforgiving war zone. "He had become the symbol of hope and strength to so many at [Kandahar Air Field]. Wylie is a pivotal part of my life and my experience in Afghanistan because of what he represents and the efforts of those around him [to save him]. Its a bond stronger and more profound than most". Wylie began his journey home in May when he was taken to the northern Afghanistan shelter of the British dog rescue charity Nowzad Dogs. In June, he flew to Britain to complete six months of quarantine, but now there needs to be raised $11,000 to get him to Australia, as Nowzad Dogs relies on public donations to reunite dogs with their adoptive owners. "[i'm looking forward to] giving him the biggest hug in the world and reminding him people are not about to give up on him," Ms Jensz said. "The next step is to introduce him to grass and the rolling waves of the ocean". Visit nowzaddonations.chipin.com/wylie to help bring Wylie home.