ellz

There was some Zoo vet TV program on last week. I only caught a glimpse of it, but there was a 4 month old wombat bubba doing zoomies....now THAT was adorable!!

I was lucky enough to pick up mine from somebody in Australia who was upgrading to the next size. I'm not sure if there are any stockists here or not, but I'm told that http://www.groomersoutlet.com/index.php?mo...t&id_prd=83 have them at a great price. I also have the blackhandled, red-topped one for "normal" slicker work, but the red matt zapper is just an amazing thing. Editing to add: Just checked that link. They have the "normal" slickers for $30 USD each. You may have to go to the actual Les Pooches site for the matt zapper. http://www.lespoochs.com/brush-matz.asp

And don't you just love it when they t-bone each other? You cringe waiting for the cracking of bones but they just grin at each other and do it again!

I have just been introduced to the MOST wonderful tool for dematting. It will dematt coats you would never have dreamed possible! Google Les Pooches. It's the red matt zapper model. Looks dangerous but oh BOY is it easy on the hand and easy on the dog as well. I give it

Roight, 3 American Cockers and a Pug on their way to you as I type!

Yep that's always scary! Although usually I'm too busy laughing to worry too much... Sash looks like a manic greyhound when she does her zoomies and changes direction a million times. It's hysterical. In saying that, I do worry when she's on the cement in the entertaining area cause she slides along it and I panic she'll hurt herself... so I yell out 'careful' in between fits of laughter My worst offender IS a manic greyhound! And the next most idiotic "zoomer" is a Staffordshire Bull Terrier. Each time the zoomies break out, I'm in severe danger of broken legs!

Usually only when they are headed straight for ME!!!

Sounds like I'm not alone then.....I can't even be bothered procrastinating!

Good to see you back. WHY do the people who have requested Main Register want it? Do they have a specific reason? Now I'm not saying your dogs are shit, but can you tell us why you did the breeding that you did? What traits were you looking for? What were you hoping to improve upon? Was the dog the best possible match for the bitch? Could you have done better? If there was any dog that you wish you COULD have used, is it STILL the dog that is in your own backyard? These are questions that every breeder should ask themselves prior to every litter that they breed.

Should add too that the Stafford standard was also written in the days when breeders thought that the black/tan would "take over" and sully everything. They didn't know back then that black/tan isn't actually a colour. Simplified, the tan comes from a tan points "gene" and is a recessive that must be on both sides of the pedigree to appear (same with liver really). And they didn't know then either that they were in more danger of getting black/tan from breeding two red smuts together than just about any other colour combination. Most other breed standards have evolved with the times. The Stafford is one of the most historically "true" standards that exists today. Rightly or wrongly, it is in black and white and hasn't been changed for many decades.

But how can you reconcile that in the same breed standard, blue is listed as an acceptable colour? It is incredibly ambiguous. Blue may well be an accepted colour, but the standard still calls for a black nose and this is impossible. The standard was also written in the days prior to knowledge of colour inheritance. What NEEDS to be done is for the country of origin clubs (ie those in the UK and the Kennel Club) to address this and either alter the standard for pigmentation OR remove the colour from the list of acceptable colours. As the standard that we use now states, nose colour must be BLACK. If something doesn't have a black nose, then no matter how else you look at it...it is not correct. Not me saying it.....just plain fact.

Well, I'm hoping that the answer will be because people have actually asked for them to be on MR. Which doesn't make it any better, but does mean that "unqualified" people aren't sending sub-standard dogs out into the gene pool and show ring. Yes, everybody bred their first litter at one stage, but MOST people who breed and sell for show are ACTIVELY exhibiting themselves and can generally make a reasonably good "guess" when it comes to choosing what they want to bear their prefix. IF it is the case that people are asking for Main registration, then I'd respectfully suggest that the OP NOT bow to pressure and place everything with the exception of what they keep for themselves on Limited Registration. As I explain to people, they are still getting a fully registered dog, but it cannot be shown or bred from. (I don't go into the semantics about breeding unregistered puppies etc, I'd rather just keep it short and sweet. The dishonest ones will already know that the colour of the rego papers won't stop them anyway). It can be difficult to remain staunch when people offer more money, or beg, plead, cajole or even threaten to try and get Main papers....been there....am actually going through this myself. But I have stated EVERYWHERE that my litter is listed that ALL PUPPIES WILL BE SOLD ON LIMITED REGISTRATION ONLY. NO EXCEPTIONS!! So if they don't like it, they can go elsewhere and many haven't worked it out, despite being told firmly, but the more they try to convince me that they deserve a Main Register puppy, the less chance they have of getting a puppy AT ALL!!!!

It depends entirely upon what the standard says and the genetics for the breed. Blue staffords CANNOT have a black nose. It is genetically impossible. The breed standard for ALL colours calls for a black nose. It doesn't say dark, almost black or anything else...it says BLACK. If you have a colour that CANNOT have a black nose, then it DOESN'T fit the standard and no amount of twisting, turning, reshaping or arguing is going to make that happen. So "technically" if you want to get REALLY pedantic, a blue Stafford is NOT a Stafford it is just a dog with blue hair and a blue, grey or if they're lucky, slate coloured nose.

If you want to look at it like then, "technically" it'd be fair to say that quality reds are "rarer" than blue in Australia now as it is....definitely much easier to purchase a blue than a red, BYBers or not. There will however, ALWAYS be brindle.

I get what the others are saying though guys.....and I have a breed which isn't renowned for being lightfooted either. There is a HUGE difference between being alert and fishing puppies out from underneath a clumsy mum to identifying which are ill, fading or suffering and acting accordingly. I don't see that anybody has said that intervention means ignorance. Although I still do meet breeders from time to time who stay awake for days prior to the birth of the litter, miss work to whelp it and then go back to work almost straight away and leave the litter and the dam to it. OK, that's their "line in the sand" but I personally couldn't do it. Heck, even with near constant vigilance I have lost a few puppies over the past 23 years to being sat on....I'd never be able to live with myself if I went to work or left for a few hours in the crucial first few days and came home to any puppy mortalities. It'd do my head in for sure.

Sadly, it is the fault of the breeders who have sold Joe Q highly inflated pricetag puppies in the first place. They have made it look easy to get their money back by churning out a litter of substandard puppies and they'll sell them to more Joe Q's who will do exactly the same. People can be very blinded by a schmick website and good salesmanship.

And thats why I did NOT say they must,only that they MAY,if they choose, make that offer, if it can be assumed etc. etc. I made it quite clear I was no expert and willing to stand corrected,but if you just want to jump on me I can handle that. Not at all. I'm not in the slightest bit upset. In fact there is somewhat of a running joke in another location at the moment because I am quite uncharacteristically "mellow" in my responses this evening. What I did was to correct your obvious misconceptions of breeders and the purebred dog world. If more breeders would take the time to do so, then so much misinformation wouldn't cloud peoples opinions and there would be a whole lot less nastiness when wires get crossed and things aren't understood clearly. Edited to fix placement of my reply and improve clarity.

There....that's what I like to hear! Good for you and good for the breeder.

*snort*

Maybe there was nothing visible at the time? Maybe the puppy wasn't an outgoing one in the nest with lots of wagging tail action? It happens. But it still comes back to the fact that if the purchaser noticed something was amiss way back when, they perhaps should have acted sooner? I assume (yes dangerous thing) that the puppy would have left home at 8 weeks. It is 20 weeks now. That's a long time for somebody to decide that there is a problem, particularly if the puppy has been treated regularly by a vet for another issue. It wouldn't be unreasonable to assume (or hope) that the tail issue could have been mentioned a lot sooner than now. Editing to add: Anyway, I have made my contribution. I don't think I have much more to add. I'll be interested to hear the outcome, both in terms of the breeder AND the long term prognosis for the puppy as well.

It goes both ways Poodlefan. One would assume the breeder SHOULD have noticed. But then one would also think the purchaser should have noticed as well. And as I said, had a post-purchase vet examination been done, the matter should probably have become evident within days of purchase rather than weeks of purchase. There is absolutely NOTHING to say that the breeder DID sell a puppy with a broken tail. Unfortunately after this much time, unless something diagnostic shows up, it is still a matter of he said, she said and will still come under Fair Trading Laws. I'll be interested to hear what the breeder has to say. If you don't want to put it on here, you're more than welcome to PM me.

Try not to sound combative or accusatory. Remember that the whole thing may take them by surprise and put them on the back foot so their initial response may not be what you are expecting. Give them a chance to process the information and work out a plan of action and if they ARE a reputable and responsible breeder, they won't just sweep it under the carpet. How they accept what you tell them will give you some very important information about their knowledge as a breeder and whether or not you should expect any kind of long-term or reasonable support and assistance from them. Good luck.

I do get your point Skybreaker. But let's face it....the internet gives lots of people lots of things to copy whether or not they truly understand the actual implications. It's fashionable to have a website and why shouldn't they be out there making themselves visible amongst all the other trillions of Stafford websites? People will say what they think "sounds good" to increase their chances of selling puppies. That's human nature and isn't confined to Staffords. Perhaps now that certain things have been pointed out to them, they will rethink their position? Personally, I think that the fact that the OP is here NOW where we can actually assist to make some changes is a good thing. If on the other hand, they will not accept the advice, or continue as they are going at the moment...then that will be a sign that they are not in it for the right reasons and THEN maybe will deserve some brickbats....and should receive them too.

If you purchased her from a reputable breeder who hip scores etc, then I'd imagine that any issues with tails would have shown up in the parents or the littermates. Another reason you need to discuss this with the breeder BEFORE taking any further action. As a breeder myself, I would be simply horrified, probably angry and incredibly upset that you were battling this without at least letting me know so that I could offer suggestions, support and as I said previously, probably arrange to have my own vet examine the puppy to get at the least a second opinion BEFORE any decisions are made.

BTW, Fair Trading treats animals as GOODS so all laws pertaining to sales of GOODS are relevant. I'm also speaking from experience. I sold a puppy to some people in another State as a show prospect. Within weeks of her arriving, she broke her toe. She recovered, they showed her. She didn't do well in the ring, apparently partly due to a slight limp and they then turned around and said she also had a bad bite. I offered a replacement from my next available litter. They wanted to keep her. Fair Trading said I had no further obligation. And as an aside, apparently the bite wasn't that bad because they bred from her on a number of occasions as well and are breeding on with her children. And incidentally neither of her sisters had bite issues and none of the offspring that came from the bitch I retained had bite issues either. But lesson learned and now get EVERYTHING in writing, even if people think it pedantic.