ellz

Why should you chase them? I'm with Sway on this one. If they're that keen, they'll contact you again or at the very least, send a decent enquiry!

:rolleyes: I was wondering when you'd get in here and spill. The suspense has been killing me!

We can only hope that will happen, but they keep on coming back. :rolleyes:

Unfortunately, you're just dreaming. I know of a couple of people who have had what can only be termed as "harrassment" aimed at them by the RSPCA over the most trivial things and to be honest, the money spent and time taken could have been better invested on more chronic cases that have been identified and are apparently being ignored.

Bad Alice. You laugh! She started out as Alice and the Bad just kind of attached itself naturally. EVERYBODY knew her as Bad Alice around here. She was a TOAD!!! She's now in Japan and is not only bilingual but is teaching everybody the rules Bad Alice way! The gentle Japanese are finding her quite challenging and very enjoyable!

http://www.themercury.com.au/article/2010/...mania-news.html RSPCA board row deepens HELEN KEMPTON | September 07, 2010 08.49am INFIGHTING continues to plague RSPCA Tasmania with another former board member being ousted for what she says is her criticism of how the animal welfare organisation is run and its lack of "teeth" in the courts. Animal advocate Suzanne Cass has been told her membership of the RSPCA is "being reviewed" because her recent media criticism had "negatively impacted on the society's ability to meet its objectives". "I am still in the dark with regard to these obscure allegations," Ms Cass said yesterday. As part of her criticism of RSPCA Tasmania's legal performance, Ms Cass released national figures which showed that while the number of complaints to the state branch had risen significantly since 2005-2006, the number of prosecutions had dropped by more than a third. Ms Cass said the enforcement of animal cruelty legislation should be a core RSPCA objective and the reason the society received government and community support. New acting RSPCA Tasmania chief executive Michael Linke has already raised concerns about "radical outside agitators" trying to destabilise the Tasmanian branch. Several hours after Ms Cass put out a media alert about her ousting, Mr Linke released positive adoption and euthanasia data which, he said, showed the society was moving in a new direction. Ms Cass was elected as part of a new RSPCA board in September last year as internal conflict resulted in the removal of the society's CEO and then its president. Ms Cass and State Government whistleblower Nigel Burch promised to shake up the society. However, both have left after less than a year of service. Ms Cass is the third board member to have her membership reviewed after raising concerns in the public sphere. Earlier in 2009, John Bates was told he was no longer welcome to volunteer at the Hobart animal shelter and Pat Gillespie's membership was revoked after she publicly criticised how RSPCA Tasmania was being managed. RSPCA Tasmania appointed a new CEO in July this year. But Karen Vanderpols fell seriously ill and was hospitalised just a few weeks into the job. She is still in hospital receiving rehabilitation treatment and it will be at least six months before the RSPCA knows if she can return to the role. RSPCA ACT chief Michael Linke is flying between Tasmania and Canberra in the interim. Mr Linke did not want to comment on the expulsion of Ms Cass yesterday, saying he wanted to concentrate on animal welfare, not human distractions. Mr Linke said RSPCA Tasmania was on the cusp of a new era.

:rolleyes: This is a not-quite 3 week old American Cocker puppy and her mother's (empty) food bowl. Her mother isn't the "sharing" type so I started Bad Alice on her own food that afternoon!

Yep, agree about the 17 days bit Miranda, but I've found that most puppies aren't ready for solids at that stage mentally. Some are, the majority don't seem ready to grasp the whole idea of chewing and swallowing as against the "easy" task of letting milk slide down their throats. That's why I tend to wait until 3 weeks (21 days) and offer it to them. Or alternatively, watch the body language of the puppies when I feed their mother. If they're in her bowl nosing around to see what goodies she has....its time!

I would start now, offer them some finely minced meat on your fingertip. If they devour that and go back looking for the finger it is DEFINITELY time to get them onto solids. I start first with pink slushies (ie mince mixed with warm milk and water) and then gradually thicken it, add texture and crunch and then before you know it, they're on 4 solid meals per day. How much depends entirely upon the individual puppy and how fast you thicken it depends upon how well they tolerate it. But generally within a few days, I find my puppies are happily crunching puppy dry food. I like Optimum puppy but others will recommend their own preferences. You could also be offering them chicken necks at that age if they are a larger breed. They won't do a lot of chewing initially but will have a great time sucking the meat off the bones and spreading it everywhere!

Over the years I've been involved with dog shows, I've had a variety of different tack boxes. I started with an old school bag. Then I saw everybody had plastic sewing boxes (without the tray insert) so I emptied my sewing stuff out and used that. Then everybody had wooden ones, so I got one of those. Then the fashion was aluminium and I was lucky enough to win a large aluminium grooming box in a dog show raffle (was a good weekend that one as we won Junior In Show at two major metro shows at Erskine Park as well! ). Then I had a variety of different human ones that were smaller but more organised, and then came the Plush Puppy tack box. And then the Wahl grooming bag (which is now my braiding bag). My latest, and what will probably be with me for a while yet is a craft box. It is like a plastic crate on wheels with a retractable handle. It has a vinyl insert that becomes the lining as well as pockets on the outside. It is roomy, great as a "catch all" and because it is on wheels, very portable.

Check out ebay in the hairdressing supplies section, they often have aluminium cases for sale at very reasonable prices.

So if it is the lab Dwarfism, then you think the breeder is right not to have done the DNA test? Honestly I have no idea how often this disease happens, perhaps no breeders in Australia test for this disease. I did see on line that it was common to test for it in europe and they were finding carriers fairly often. I saw the one gal on this topic said she has seen it in black labs, so I assume that the breeders must know about it and the DNA test that is available. Honestly I do not know what is the norm for prevention of this disease in labs. I didn't say that. It would depend entirely upon what the problem is and how readily available and affordable the testing is and also, an indicator of whether or not the test should be required or recommended, would be frequency of the condition appearing. If a condition is not READILY prevalent in a breed, then I see no reason to throw the baby out with the bathwater and assume that ALL conditions should be tested for. For example, we struck this in American Cocker Spaniels. There was a DNA test made available for one particular type of PRA that can afflict the breed. Some had the testing done, I, like many others chose not to. Until there is a DNA test available for ALL types of PRA, then why on earth would I want to pay a few hundred dollars for something that will not give me a clear answer anyway when the same amount will have to be paid for subsequent testing for other types of PRA and especially when PRA, whilst common in the breed, is certainly not THE most common eye condition that affects American Cockers. What the OP called for was the sire, dam and all littermates to be desexed. I'm sorry, but if somebody who had a health issue with a puppy that I bred, rang me and demanded this, I wouldn't exactly be overly forthcoming towards them either, beyond offering the refund and wiping my hands of the person once either I had the puppy or the refund was refused. At that time, I would do my own research to decide whether or not I needed to go a step further in my testing regime or not. But at MY instigation and not at the insistence of an obviously disgruntled puppy purchaser.

I don't agree. The answer is that unfortunately "shit happens" when breeding dogs. BUT by dealing with registered breeders who test for what they can test for, and follow the LAW when things go wrong (ie offer a refund), then a buyer does at least have something more than a closed door in their face which is what they will get from a BYBer or unethical breeder. I think the issue here is more that the breeder of the litter and the owner (breeder?) of the sire have not given the OP the answers that they WANT is more like the truth. And as I have said in this thread already, if the OP has approached any of those parties in the manner in which they have posted here, I'm really not surprised that people have not been more forthcoming.

Good for you Bokezu. But that is YOUR individual way of dealing with things. It doesn't make another breeder who would refund and take the puppy back worse, just different. They are at least abiding by the laws of Fair Trading. If it were me however, I'd probably take the puppy back and euthanase it, simply because I, and very few other people I know would have the $11k that has apparently been spent on it. I certainly couldn't justify spending anywhere near that amount of money if there was no GUARANTEE that things could be fixed and quality of life maintained. Could I also ask the OP to clarify why they came into the forum posting a "what if?" post initially, when it is apparent that they actually have an axe to grind and it isn't advance research that they are doing?

Steve, many have tried over the years to "fight back" and is is evidenced, not even the RSPCA is immune to Burke's drivel. All I can say is that if you can do better than those who have tried....be our guest. Look forward to seeing the results.

I've got a piccy of something that looks a little like a jigsaw puzzle of Basenji babies!

Dog shows are not law, they are a hobby. A very expensive, at times heartbreaking, largely self-regulated hobby. And no, not every breeder has dog showing as a priority. For myself, I accept that the majority of the dogs that I breed will end up in companion homes. I breed first and foremost for health and temperament and if a dog happens to turn out as what *I* believe is show quality, then that is a bonus. Who has the control to stop unethical people from breeding? Themselves and the law. And in the case of the breeder you have mentioned, they have not done anything OUTSIDE the law. Simple as that. They bred a problem, you let them know, they offered to take the puppy back and refund your money, you refused. Your decision, now you must live with it. From the prospective of the breeder, the problem you had may be something that has never arisen before or it may be something that occurs as a result of a recessive gene. If that is the case, then only breeding carrier or affected to each other can produce it. How do you know that the owner and/or breeder of both parents have not taken that on board and will not breed those two dogs together again? You stated that sire and dam and all litter mates need to be desexed....are you a geneticist or do you just happen to have a crystal ball?? And as for the owner of the sire stating she never wanted to hear from you again...have you considered that it may be nothing to do with the actual problem, but just may be your approach? Because from the "vibes" that I'm getting from your posts here, you may have a lot to learn about public relations and the good old-fashioned saying "you catch more flies with honey than you do with vinegar".

And just in addition to what ReadySetGo said....if you contacted the Dept of Fair Trading, they would tell you that the breeder has done the right thing and has no further responsibility to you if you choose to refuse to accept their offer of a refund. Think about it in other terms (yes I know it is a living breathing animal but in the eyes of the law, a dog is still "goods"). Say you'd bought a chair from Kmart. The chair was faulty. You contacted Kmart and they offered to refund your money. You accept and that is the end of the matter. But you must return the chair first. It isn't an option to keep the chair AND get the refund. As to what happens to the puppy if returned to the breeder for a refund. That is their business and although you feel you have done the right thing by spending so much to fix your dog, others wouldn't agree. Many would feel it inhumane to continue attempting to fix the problems and would feel more comfortable to euthanase. That is one of the decisions that a breeder has to make.

They may not be, but that doesn't mean that others are the same. no it doesnt and that is when the dog councils and the ankc should step in to take control of the situation. But you see under the law, the ANKC and its state controlling bodies have no power. They are ONLY registering bodies. They have no power to do anything except maintain registers of purebred dogs and create and administer rules for dog shows.

They may not be, but that doesn't mean that others are the same.

Noooooo! And did you know that I've gained 2 kilos since arriving here?? Damn Tasmanian goodies :p Ahhhh....EVERYBODY in the Central Highlands knows that it is far more comfortable to layer the body in fat during winter/spring. Polar fleece just don't cut it! :p

And of course, next time you drive into New Norfolk, if you're on the Lyell Highway, bip your horn and give me a wave! Little creamy/yellow cottage with green shutters on the right opposite the Bothwell turnoff. Actually, we'll have to organise to meet up for a cuppa in New Norfolk some time....and did you know they've just opened up a lolly/ice cream parlour there? Next to Banjos! :p

OK, shortcut to Brighton goes through Elderslie. You go through Hamilton heading towards New Norfolk and it is the turnoff at the top of the hill where the overtaking lane ends coming the other way. First left turn past the Hamilton Plains Road intersection. Dirt for part of the way but not undriveable. And believe me, I.DO.NOT.DO.GRAVEL!!!!!!!!! :p Gotta love the goat track from Ouse to Bothwell. Would you believe buses actually go that way? But the best way to Bothwell is to turn left at the Hollow Tree Rd turnoff about 3kms out of Hamilton towards New Norfolk (and directly opposite my large paddock). The road is sealed and whilst windy, isn't in too bad condition, although we drove it today and it needs a bit of work. Coming the other way from Melton Mowbray via Bothwell, you missed the turnoff....should have turned left between the shop and the servo (which is right next to the pub) and that would have brought you out onto the Lyell Highway at the intersection mentioned immediately above.

I'm sorry but I would have never agreed to such a thing. Stipulations like that are fantastic while you both agree, but generally the minute that the purchaser "sees the light" or the seller thinks they have lost control and the purchaser is learning too much....things tend to get nasty! I don't want to frighten you but a dispute over ownership of a dog cost me a lot of money, a shitload of angst and my marriage. And it was all because the seller suddenly realised that they didn't have a puppet who would do as they were told at their disposal.

OK so what happens if the breeder wants to breed from the bitch and you're not ready? Or they want to use a dog that you don't want to use? Personally, I would not pay full price for any puppy with conditions that could conceivably remove ANY of the control of YOUR property from you.