labsrule

We are plumb tuckered out mum I love you too little buddy Thanks for the headrest, little buddy Does that feel good You rest Buddy, I'll keep an eye out Best Buddies

I would to introduce you to my youngest Lab, Tana, my 5mth old pup and my oldest boy, Thomas who will be 14yrs old next month. From the day I brought Tana home on 5/12/09 as a 10 week old pup, he buddied up straight away with Thomas. To this day he just idolises and loves him and Thomas has just been so brilliant with him and so tolerant of him, too tolerant at times . The photos are in order from the day Tana arrived todate: The love story begins ;) You lead the way Buddy and I will follow I love you Thomas My best snugglebuddy My best buddy will protect me I trhink I have worn him out mum Awww Thomas please let me sleep on your bed with you Wakey wake Thomas - get up and play with me, pleeeeaaaaassseee

I have issues with the bits in your post that I have highlighted. You cannot compare a Lab x and a Lab. You have stated that you keep your dog lean because of joint issues, but to say that this Lab is carrying around 15kg-18kg of fat because you compare him to your dog is not on To expect a purebred male Lab to be 25kg, shows that you do not know much about Labs Is 42kgs a healthy weight for a purebred male lab? :rolleyes: My stoopid phone which has pics of Honey specially taken for this thread has died. I'll have to take more photos tomorrow on my camera. I can see how you would think she is thin with that chart directly below the pic. However, I still feel that she is a good size- she has loads of energy, her fur is good etc. She is really healthy and fit and has a very high tuck (I think thats what you call it?). Personally I would prefer that she was on the thin side than overweight. I didn't say that 42kg was a healthy weight? The OP stated that this Lab was carrying 15kg-18kg of fat compared to her lean 25kg Lab x :D I took exception to the OP comparing the Lab with her dog who is a Lab x and who by her own admission, is lean due to joint problems and the fact that the OP expects a pure bred male dog to be the same weight as her dog Whilst there are standard weight range for most breeds, just because a dog is outside that weight range doesn't automatically make it fat or unhealthy. Do you think that any female GR that is heavier than Honey is fat or unhealthy?, just because you personally want a lean dog. There is weight variability in the canine world just like there is in the human world and because a dog or human is not within the "standard weight range" for their breed/height, doesn't automatically make the dog or person fat or unhealthy. If you are happy with Honey's size/weight, then that is fine, she is your dog, but the nature of your thread is essentially asking for opinions on whether Honey is too skinny or not. I happen to think she is too skinny.

I have issues with the bits in your post that I have highlighted. You cannot compare a Lab x and a Lab. You have stated that you keep your dog lean because of joint issues, but to say that this Lab is carrying around 15kg-18kg of fat because you compare him to your dog is not on To expect a purebred male Lab to be 25kg, shows that you do not know much about Labs

When I first looked at your photo of Honey, I thought she looked too thin and now thanks to the chart posted by TeamSnag I am convinced she is too thin. It may be helpful to have a closeup recent photo of her dry as you said that this photo was taken a month ago, and she is wet. :D

I make no apology for having an "intransigent opinion" on this seminar, as a "puppy farmer" :D was given a platform at a Seminar on "Building Better Dogs" run by the uni's Animal Welfare Science Centre. This reason that you give that this puppy farmer was invited because she had "something new" to present, does not wash with me, as a puppy farmer does not give a toss about "animal welfare/building better dogs", they are in it for pure profit and subject their dogs to a life of misery, no matter what spin or sugar coating they try to put on it. :D The only reason this "something new" to present by this puppy farmer has come about, is not due to the puppy farmers all of a sudden having a change of heart and deciding on their own, to try and improve living conditions for their poor dogs , it is because the RSPCA have puppy farmers firmly in their sights Puppy farmers concerned about animal welfare, don't think so . Maybe you all should read the RSPCA's PuppyFarm Discussion Paper RSPCA'S PuppyFarm Discussion Paper I agree that Uni's should be a place for robust debate, however, in this case, I believe the relevant stakeholders for this debate were not invited to present, so a pretty lopsided debate to me. I am still left shaking my head over the fact that a uni conducting a seminar on "Building Better Dogs" invited a puppy farmer, whose sole aim in life is to profit from their dogs' misery, to present at this seminar. Couple this with the fact that a representative from the Registered Purebred Dog Community, whose whole purpose is to promote excellence in breeding to produce temperamentally and physically sound pure bred dogs was excluded from presenting at this Seminar, then we are left to draw our own conclusions on the Uni's stance on this matter.

Totally agree with you Jed and one of the reasons that I was so incensed when reading this thread was the fact that this low life puppy farmer is a Vet and I believe is one of the reasons why she was invited to present at this seminar - after all, the seminar was conducted by the veterinary fraternity at Monash under the guise of "animal welfare" - that is a joke . Animal welfare and puppy farmers make strange bedfellows!! A Vet knowingly causing abject misery to so many dogs over so many years in the pursuit of greed is reprehensible and unforgiveable and so to is the invite extended to this puppy farmer by Monash Animal Welfare Science Centre to present "A model for an association of professional pet dog breeders", whilst excluding the registered purebred dog breeding community . I find this whole thing outrageous, insulting and so unethical it beggars belief ;) and this leaves a sour taste in my mouth with regards to veterinary science research and I doubt I will ever participate again in any uni research dog studies and will be most vocal in my opposition to funding in areas linked to puppy farmers, as I cannot/will not support organisations or institutes that give any credence to puppy farmers in any way shape or form .

Hi WhiteEagle I hope your girl is doing better and hope her weight is stabilising. to you and your lovely girl and best wishes for improvement in her condition.

What new stuff to help "Build Better Dogs" - a Code of Ethics that passes the buck to the Pet Shop to take responsibiliy to take back & rehome the puppy farmer's rejects from disillusioned or irresponsible owners Mmmmm your last para and you wonder "why some posters are dismissive and even antagonistic of the science researchers" - credibility is sure being diminished by posts like the one above. Time to take my dogs out for a walk and get away from this nonsense.

Yes, but I mean a representative from outside the Veterinary fraternity, like a representative from ANKC/Dogs VIC. She's not a vet. She's an academic at Monash with a background in behavioural neuroscience and psychology. She established the Anthrozoology Research Group there. Ok, then outside the Veterinary and University fraternity Let me make it a bit clearer, a representative of Registered Purebred Dog Breeders, i.e. representative from ANKC or DogsVic Or MDBA? Aren't they currently doing some research projects? Perhaps the ANKC could sponsor a future seminar. Ok, so who sponsored the Building Better Dogs Seminar? - the puppy farmers group?? is that why they took centre stage? and no Purebred Breeders representative outside the Veterinary/University fraternity where offered a presenters spot to challenge them?

Great letter Steve and I do hope that this gets taken seriously by Dogs NSW and would be interested to know if anyone at Dogs NSW was aware of this "failing" to collect data to identify whether the dog was bred by a pedigree registered breeder or any other breeder. Do you know if the puppy farmer's group has contributed financially to this program

Yes, but I mean a representative from outside the Veterinary fraternity, like a representative from ANKC/Dogs VIC. She's not a vet. She's an academic at Monash with a background in behavioural neuroscience and psychology. She established the Anthrozoology Research Group there. Ok, then outside the Veterinary and University fraternity Let me make it a bit clearer, a representative of Registered Purebred Dog Breeders, i.e. representative from ANKC or DogsVic

Yes, but I mean a representative from outside the Veterinary fraternity, like a representative from ANKC/Dogs VIC.

Sheriden my point was about dialogue needing to be opened up, and while I threw in "pet shops" the main thrust is that many posters in this thread have been dismissive and even antagonistic of the science researchers, yet who would you need to speak to about your protein losing disease...? Is it any wonder when this seminar is obviously oriented towards the views of the low life puppy farmers of crossbreeds, by giving one of these low life’s a platform to extol the virtues of crossbreeding over purebred breeding and to denigrate purebred breeders who were not given the same opportunity to present at this seminar and to challenge this low life puppy farmer’s controversial points of view . These low life puppy farmers profit from the misery of these poor, unfortunate dogs being “farmed” commercially and don’t give a toss about their health, living conditions and misery they subject them to . How could a veterinary scientific community who runs a seminar on “Building Better Dogs” be respected and be seen as credible, when the very community that does really care for their dogs, that provide the necessary health tests and home reared living conditions and necessary socialisation and spend their lives trying to improve and better their breeds are excluded from presenting at this seminar . However, the low life puppy farmers who in their pursuit of profit, breed some very questionable dogs, health wise and temperament wise, which is the opposite of “Building Better Dogs”, get to present at this seminar . This is perceived as an obvious bias towards the low life puppy farmers . Why is that, could it be that the low life puppy farmer representative is a Vet and therefore deemed more credible by the veterinary fraternity?? Can one of you “science researchers” involved in this seminar please explain to the Purebred Dog Breeding Community why they (i.e. a representative) were not given an opportunity to be a Presenter at this Seminar, when the subject matter is essentially what “they live and breathe” and explain to them why a low life puppy farmer, who is the antithesis of everything they practice, was given the opportunity to extol her controversial views on dog breeding (farming), unchallenged .

So sorry about your lovely girl's rapid weight loss, poor baby must be very worrying for you on top of her pancreatitis Best wishes for good news from her blood tests and to finding out what is causing her weight loss and treatment options to help get her back on the road to recovery Thinking of you and your girl

Sorry to hear about your lovely boy openarms and all the best for your boy's op and hoping madly for a good outcome for his test results. Will be thinking about you and your boy

YEs. But if your dog is diagnosed when it is 10 and it lives to be 15 (possible in the small breed that I have) you will only be covered for the one year of treatment? With PetPlan, you'll be covered for life (at 65% - which would land up paying out a lot more). That is my understanding of it as well. Yesterday after reading Rommi n Lewis question above yesterday, I actually had a look at my Certificate of Insurance & Rates and Benefits Schedule and then rang PIA yesterday to clarify this situation as well as clarification on the "chronic conditions" (which I must admit I hadn't noticed before ) and what I found out is this: Senior Dogs - If an insured dog is over 9 years they are restricted to the maximum annual benefit amount of the policy, which in my case is $15,000. However, if the annual benefit is not claimed in full during the current policy year, then the remaining amount can be rolled over to the next year and subsequent years e.g. say at 10 years of age my dog requires treatment say to the value of $7000 during that policy year, then they the remaining benefit amount of $8000 can be used up over subsequent years until the full amount is claimed. The dog is insured for life, so even after the first partial claim after they are over 9 years of age, the policy can be renewed and the remaining benefit claimed if required in subsequent years, until the full benefit amount is fully claimed. Chronic Conditions - irrespective of age, if a dog is diagnosed with a chronic condition, i.e. a Condition which, once developed, is deemed incurable or is likely to continue for the remainder of the dog's life, then they are only entitled to the maximum annual benefit during their lifetime . i.e. if say my dog at 3 years of age, is diagnosed with a chronic condition that requires treatment to the value of say $5,000 in one year, then the remaining $10,000 can be claimed over subsequent years until this amount is fully used and then no more claims can be made for that condition. Hope that all makes sense . I will need to give some more thought to this when the policy comes up for renewal next year as the "chronic conditions" restriction concerns me more, as this applies to a dog irrespective of age and whilst a condition may be "chronic" it may be able to be managed with a good quality of life for the dog over a number of years, but there is a cap of one year of full benefit, even though if not fully claimed in one year can be rolled over to subsequent years. I am not overly concerned about the benefit for a dog over 9 being capped to the maximum of one year's full benefit, as unused amounts can also be rolled over to subsequent years and irrespective of whether I had insurance or not, I would not prolong the suffering of an older dog with a major illness or injury over a number of years anyway. Hopefully, my pup won't incur any injuries and I don't need to make any claims that will affect my pup's insurance history and hopefully Petplan will sort out their new computer system and processing of claims and in the meantime between now and my renewal date (jan 2011 so I have a lot of time ;) ) I can do some further research. :D

Very cute, but definitely not a lab, tis one of yours

groupfive, so sorry for the heartbreaking loss of your beautiful boy ;) , my heart goes out to you It all happened so fast and I know how devastated you must have been to receive the grim prognosis of your boy's IMHA and then have to make the agonising decision to PTS your beautiful boy I was confronted with the same agonising decision last year when my beautiful lab boy's Cancer spread to his lungs and whilst we do it to spare them any further pain and suffering and get told how brave and selfless we are, the decision is to end their lives is just so gutwrenching awful that it cuts you to the core . It truly is one of life's hardest decisions to make but we do it because we love our dogs too much to prolong their suffering and their quality of life must come first . My thoughts are with you during this terrible time as you grieve for your beautiful boy RIP Fellow run free with no more pain

x 4 PIA - I initially took out insurance for my Lab pup with with Petplan, but after reading their Product Disclosure booklet and found that they have reduced coverage (65%) when dogs reach 10 years of age (or 7 years of age for Selected Breeds), I cancelled the policy and took out a policy with PIA instead as they have 100% coverage for dogs 9 years and over I was not happy about PetPlan's reduced coverage for aging dogs as there is more likelihood of a dog getting ill and possibly requiring expensive veterinary treatments as they get older and I would like peace of mind of 100% insurance cover if this happened to my new dog when he ages. This area of coverage is very important to me as I incurred some pretty hefty veterinary bills last year for my beautiful 10 year old black lab boy who had an emergency operation at a Vet Specialist Centre and subsequent Cancer diagnosis, followed by Chemotherapy and I lost him in September Also with PetPlan I opted for the Supreme Cover which has a $2000 benefit for death by illness/accident, however, this benefit is not paid if your dog reaches 10 years of age or older and dies from illness I have also heard/read some horror stories about PetPlan's delay in processing claims and handling general administration and it took them over two weeks to issue my Policy paperwork, and even after I cancelled my policy, I received another set of policy paperwork from them ;) . PIA issued my Policy in a week and I have heard nothing but good things about the expedient processing of claims/handling general administration etc.

Yes, my beautiful black lab boy Fitzy who I lost in September at 10 years of age thru cancer He was a special boy from the get go and he turned my life upside down in so many ways :D from the very first day he came into my life as an adorable, but scallywag 16 week old pup :D . His joy for life knew no bounds, he was so happy, so beautifully natured, so socialable and charmed every dog and human he met along the way. Always happy, very outgoing, larger than life, exhuberant boy who lived every day like it was his last throughout his lifetime. His joy for life, his enthusiasm in everything he did was infectious and during his lifetime so many people commented on "what a happy boy he was" when they met him and he was always a favourite in the doggie world of Vet staff, Vets, Vet Specialists, groomer, boarding kennels etc etc because of his happy disposition and love of life ;) He truly was a special boy, a once in a lifetime dog who changed my life forever and I miss him immensely and will for the rest of my life ;) Treasure and enjoy your happy little girl and I wish you many years of happiness with your gorgeous girl like I had with my beautiful boy .

Oh Reg :) you fought so hard, you started improving, we were all hoping like hell it would continue ;) , and I am devastated to read you lost your fight ;) RIP you brave old boy such a terrible way to go and we shed tears for what you went through and now many more for your loss. My thoughts are with your owner and Indigirl during this terrible time :D :D

So pleased to hear that Reg is slowly improving, that is very good news and hopefully it will continue. He is in my thoughts and sending many more healing vibes his way ;) . Keep fighting Reg, you are a special boy and I hope to read of your continued recovery .

Hoping the poor boy is doing OK

So sorry for your huge loss , he was a very special boy and I know how devastated you must be :D . He touched a lot of people and my heart goes out to you. RIP Rocco