oakway

What are the chances that the damage will repair it's self over time.

Nah, I would go along with the others as in How old is your wife /mother and how many children ?.

Don't feel badly we have all been in this situation when when we have used Bayer. If this helps............I found when the bitches were on Ivomec for Heart Worm monthly, the puppies born had little or no worm burden what so ever.

Watch out for the rattlers instead.

Congratulations DOGS QLD. http://www.dogsqueensland.org.au/News.aspx?id=253 AmStaff Update - Amended Law Explained 8 October 2010 Justice for American Staffordshire Terriers In Queensland Amendment 63a receives Royal Assent Members would no doubt be aware of the strong defence which Dogs Queensland mounted on behalf of pedigreed, registered Amstaffs and their owners in our State. Much has been written explaining the background to this issue but for the record, a brief summary of the events leading up to and since would be valuable. The Honourable Justice Martin, when considering the evidence presented in the Supreme Court of Queensland in the application brought by Ms Kylie Chivers in respect to her dog "Tango" against the Gold Coast City Council, decided that her American Staffordshire Terrier (commonly called an AmStaff) was in fact an American Pit Bull Terrier (APBT). This decision was not surprising at all given that Justice Martin could only ever be expected to base his findings upon the evidence presented to the court. What is most interesting is that a review of court transcripts reveals that the very evidence upon which the Judge relied was actually submitted by the appellant, Ms Kylie Chivers. Whilst it must seem to many members that this issue has been on the Dogs Queensland radar for quite some time (since March 2010), the speed with which the Queensland Government reached a responsible decision was actually quite rapid and followed a predetermined process. Dogs Queensland is therefore delighted to report that on Monday 20th September 2010, amendment 63a to the Animal Management (Cats and Dogs) Act 2008 received Royal Assent and became law in Queensland. After two Parliamentary readings and lengthy debate, the proposed amendment was passed in what must now be considered a significant landmark decision, not only for pedigreed registered Amstaffs but for all Pedigreed Registered dogs both here in Queensland and Australia wide. In its entirety, 63a reads as follows: 63A Provisions for deciding what is a breed of dog: (1) Each of the following certificates, for a dog, is evidence the dog is of the breed stated in the certificate: (a) a pedigree certificate from the Australian National Kennel Council (ANKC); (b) a pedigree certificate from a member body of the ANKC; © a pedigree certificate from a national breed council registered with the ANKC; (d) a certificate signed by a veterinary surgeon stating, or to the effect that the dog is of a particular breed. (2) However, if a dog is of the breed American Staffordshire terrier, it is not of the breed American Pit Bull Terrier. (3) Also, the breed American Pit Bull Terrier does not include a dog of the breed American Staffordshire Terrier. The wording of 63a does warrant some explanation – it contains certain terminology which may appear "foreign or different " to most of our members. First and foremost is the fact that the Queensland Government have only accepted into law those breeds recognised by the ANKC. By virtue of the very mention of ANKC pedigrees, the State Government have acknowledged that we actually "own and manage" those breeds – we own the standards, we issue the pedigree paperwork, we determine if a breed is included on our registers and as such we determine the breeds that can be issued with an official ANKC pedigree. The legislation, by inference does not recognise cross bred dogs or designed dogs as "true dog breeds". It is also worth mentioning that to the best of our knowledge, 63a is the first time that our National Body or our affiliated State Controlling Bodies have been specifically mentioned in legislation. The 63a legislative amendment follows directly after clause 63 of the Act, which defines "What is a Restricted Dog" and it explains that "A restricted dog is a dog of a breed prohibited from importation into Australia under the Customs Act 1901 (Commonwealth)". Note – there are currently 5 restricted breeds which are prohibited from importation into Australia – Presa Canario, filo Brasileiro, dogo Argentino, Tosa Inu and American Pit Bull Terrier. Section (1) of 63a provides clear definitions of the acceptable methods to be used for positive identification of a breed of dog. It is very important for members to note here that points (a) to (d) are not actually specific to AmStaffs – they apply to all breeds of dog. So, if in the future any of our other recognised breeds should come under threat, then the approved method of identification is explained in legislation – and that method is written into law. (a) A pedigree certificate from the Australian National Kennel Council (ANKC) Note – all of our registered pedigreed dogs have these documents and pedigrees are immediately identifiable and can be validated by the gold ANKC logo in the bottom right hand corner of the document. (b) A pedigree issued by a member body of ANKC Note – for a pedigreed registered dog that has been transferred onto the Queensland register from an Interstate ANKC affiliated Controlling body or a dog that has been imported into Australia from overseas and placed on the ANKC register and then reregistered by an ANKC affiliated State Controlling body. © A pedigree from an ANKC National Breed Council Note – members may see this as a curious inclusion because at present, no ANKC recognised National Breed Council has the ability to issue a pedigree certificate. However, this covers situations where at some point in the future a breed may be under development, as was the case with Stumpy Tail Cattle Dogs. And having the provision in place does not detract or weaken the intent of the legislation. (d) A certificate signed by a Veterinary Surgeon stating, or to the effect, that the dog is of a particular breed Note – this provision was included by Government to cover the situation where recognised paperwork (a pedigree) had been lost or not transferred from Interstate or Overseas. The onus then rests completely with a Veterinary Surgeon to determine the breed of dog if methods covered in (a), (b) and © above can not be supplied or complied with. It would also cover a situation where a particular dog has been purchased from a pet Shop and no paperwork has been provided. Section (2) of 63a states that: "However, if a dog is of the breed American Staffordshire Terrier, it is not of the breed American Pit Bull Terrier". Note – in other words, an AmStaff is not the same breed of dog as the restricted Pit Bull. Section (3) of 63a goes on to state that: "Also, the breed American Pit Bull Terrier does not include a dog of the breed American Staffordshire Terrier". Note – if a dog is identified as a restricted Pit Bull, then it is not a recognised AmStaff. We are absolutely certain that all members (both here and Australia wide) will understand exactly what has been achieved via the 63a amendment. It sets a precedent for all other State Governments to follow if ever the question of "how to identify a breed of dog" becomes an issue in the future. This successful outcome has helped Dogs Queensland to establish what we now consider to be a template for our future dealings with Government in Queensland – be it at State or Local level. The winning formula which Dogs Queensland employed was simple when reviewed afterwards. It was not dissimilar in many ways to what could be described as a Business Strategy and the key elements of that plan could be summarised as follows: 1. Identify the issue quickly and accurately, 2. Manoeuvre that issue urgently to "top of mind" status with Government, 3. Identify and only deal with the right people within Government – the key decision makers, 4. Explain the implications and ramifications to all levels of Government, 5. Offer reliable expert advice and be available 24/7, 6. Provide workable solutions – use recognised Government language, 7. Respect Government confidentiality and expect the same in return, 8. Communicate with members regularly and share information where appropriate, 9. Follow up often – don't assume that the wheels of Government are turning, 10. Don't be afraid to tell Government that they may be heading down the less desirable path – if that does happen, then go back to point 1. above and start again.

Yes I think your right. I just seem to write it out of sheer habit. I don't know much else other than pure bred dogs.

Will this help about pet shop sales. Mr Neil Laurie The Clerk of the Parliament Queensland Parliamentary Service Parliament House George Street Brisbane Qld 4000 N~ Dear~ Thank you for your letter of 15 September 2010 concerning a petition (Petition 1398-10) to prohibit the sale of cats and dogs in pet shops received by the Queensland Legislative Assembly. The Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation (DEEDI), through Biosecurity Queensland, is responsible for animal welfare standards for all animals in Queensland through the Animal Care and Protection Act 2001 (ACPA). The ACPA places a duty of care on all persons in charge of animals, including pet shops and breeders to properly look after their animals. The ACPA provides a balance between the welfare of animals, community expectations, and the interests of persons whose livelihood is dependent upon animals. Banning the sale of dogs and cats through a pet shop would need to be justified. Such justification would need to demonstrate that the purchase of animals from pet shops results in a significantly higher risk to the welfare of animals than purchased from other sources and Biosecurity Queensland is not aware of any evidence which supports the case. The prevention of the sale of dogs and cats through pet shops is likely to drive sales to other areas which are more difficult to monitor and have a higher animal welfare risk. On 8 June 2008, the Premier announced the Queensland Government's strategy to address the numbers of dogs and cats euthanased every year. The strategy included: . . the development of a voluntary Code of Practice for Pet Shops (the Pet Shop Code) the development of a legislative framework for the Statewide compulsory registration of dogs and cats with desexing incentives, microchipping at point of sale and the tattooing of animals when desexed GPO Box 46 Brisbane Queensland 4001 Australia Telephone +61 7 3239 3000 Facsimile +61 7 3229 8541 Email dpi@... ABN 65 959 415 158 a six month public education program. two-year pilot studies by selected local governments to trial innovative measures to increase desexing rates in dogs and cats Level 8 Primary Industries Building 80 Ann Street Brisbane . . 2 The Pet Shop Code, which was released in December 2008, provides guidelines for the care and management of animals in pet shops and encourages pet retailers to source their animals from responsible suppliers. DEEDI is continuing to work with pet shops to ensure the appropriate guidelines are in place and animal welfare matters are appropriately managed. The Animal Management (Cats and Dogs) Act 2008 was passed on 11 December 2008 and provides for the mandatory registration of all cats and dogs and for the microchipping of all puppies and kittens. All local government councils will need to comply with the Animal Management (Cats and Dogs) Act 2008 by 12 December 2010. Four local government councils were allocated a share of $315,000 to conduct pilot studies aimed at increasing cat and dog desexing and encourage responsible pet ownership. These pilot studies include: . Moreton Bay Regional Council ($86,000) - working with local veterinary surgeons to promote cat desexing, using the RSPCA's Mobile Education Unit and Portable Animal Welfare Service . Gold Coast City Council ($77,000) - trialling an approved breeder permit scheme and an education campaign focusing on appropriate enclosures for cats . Logan City Council ($84,000) - constructing a dedicated community animal desexing clinic . Townsville City Council ($68,000) - restarting the CatScan program on Magnetic Island, which includes compulsory microchipping of cats over five months and an education campaign. At the conclusion of the pilot studies, consideration will be given as to whether compulsory desexing is an appropriate next step. In the meantime, Councils must provide registration fee incentives for owners to desex their animals. DEEDI, through the Office of Fair Trading, is also able to investigate allegations of false or misleading representations by traders, including those in the retail sector. Persons aware of any breaches are advised to contact the Office of Fair Trading on telephone 137468 or visit the DEEDI website at www.deedi.qld.gov.au. If you require any further information regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact Robert Cassidy of DEEDI on telephone 07 3247 3359 or email robert.cassidy@.... Yours sincerely TIM MULHERIN, MP Minister for Primary Industries, Fisheries and Rural and Regional Queensland Member for Mackay

Who is 'they'? I don't believe this theory at nay rate, regardless of who 'they' are... unless 'they' are radical extremists in general. I find it more plausible to believe that when people call for change, they don't think it through and look ahead. They only see their small parametre of what they feel needs changing. The impact of this shortsightedness and blinkered view is that the net is cast far wider than intended. I also feel it is our gross entanglement of legislation, and those that create and manage it, and laws that compunds the issues. i think it means "they" the animal groups calling for bans. or they could mean RSPCA, the stuff they have on their website about pedigree dogs i could very well believe it too. its just total crap i still think that half of what RSPCA are saying in their website is from no one ever stepping into the dogworld adn taking a look around and see what goes on. it sounds like RSPCA are quoting direct from PDE. Sorry I should have made it more clear They can appear as who ever you wish RSPCA PETA Animal Liberation As far as I am concerned any person or body that opposes the breeding of Pure Bred Dogs. ( Maybe in todays climate that should read any person that breeds a dog weather it be pure or not).

Toydog it doesn't matter what they call themselves they have one objective and that is to get rid of dog breeders . Full Stop

They are here because they are fact.

For goodness sake !!! The dog has lived all his life, 12 years, on the property, it is his home, he was home even if his home is 607 hectares (which is huge). Doesn't matter how long the dog has lived there. The owners are at fault for letting the dog wander. If the dog had been confined to a safe area this would not have happened. Again we have a dog suffering because of it's owners.

People get your head around it What is happening in this country is caused by the Animal Liberation Movement. They have infiltrated all organizations in one way or another. You are being used by them in many forms and disguises to do their bidding unwittingly. Be careful with what you put your trust in.

Totally agree with you.

Steve Will you please give permission for me to copy the above that you have written to hand out to other persons.

One of the greatest problems will be that we are scattered all over the country and unless we ALL support one organization we will ALL lose out. We already know of the problems we have because we have NO single controlling canine body. Thus why i belive we should stand untited and help each state I can't see an objection to one organisation fighting for our very existence lord knows NONE of our state bodies has come to the aid of the party. Also nobody come on here and try and tell me that we have the ANKC because that is a joke between persons that hold state membership.

One of the greatest problems will be that we are scattered all over the country and unless we ALL support one organization we will ALL lose out. We already know of the problems we have because we have NO single controlling canine body.

The same as Rysup Troy Worm Ban

Would somebody please explain to me why this dog was allowed to wander loose. Poor dog has suffered because the owner didn't confine the dog to a safe area on the property.

I always use and recommend Dogtainers they ship world wide.

I have had mine lined with aluminum as the dogs chewed the 3 ply it was lined with. As much as we all like to put the hose in the dog trailer and clean it out, dog trailers are not meant to be hosed out. Think of them as caravans, would you put the hose in your caravan ?. Yes, I put the hose in mine to, but we shouldn't. A lot of the time this can cause rotting of the floorboards. Mine has rotted to. I always like wooden floors as they don't pick the heat of the road as much as a metal floor.

It is not diet related nor is a deficiency of any kind. They are dog's and dog's do things like this. The best advise I was given about it was don't look, if it is your own dogs eating their mate's just add some cheap crushed plain label pineapple to their diet as that seem to stop it.

I have also had word's with Bayer over the suspension. I now use another product to worm my puppies.

On thing this has brought into the daylight is that unless we stand on a united front we are not going to get anywhere. Unless we have the financial backing from one of the media groups to push our case I can see all our efforts going down the drain.

What I want to know is ..................... Where do I go to, to help. What do I have to do personally to help the situation the dog world finds it's self in. Sitting here typing is not helping. Someone give me some direction please. If it means putting my hand in my pocket you will have to forget my help, because a pension does not allow it. Or is that the root of the matter ? even collectively does anyone have the money to fight the situation.