sandgrubber

I sure hope so. I think published reasons will be very important. No, apparently they are not going to reveal the reasons. http://www.dogworld....hecks_at_crufts "The Kennel Club would not reveal why they failed the new checks – introduced to Crufts this year – and said it would not do so for any of the 15 high-profile breeds although the reasons will be given to the club by the vet involved. The owners have no recourse to appeal." . . . looks like exaggerated features has something to do with it. ... "The veterinary checks were introduced to ensure that dogs with exaggerated features do not win prizes," said KC spokesman Caroline Kisko on Thursday evening. "The independent vet decided that the Pekingese and Bulldog should not pass their vet checks and therefore they did not receive their BOB awards and will not be representing the breeds in the remainder of the competition."

http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/item/4199/23/5/3 Bulldog and Pekingese fail Crufts vet checks No dog representing the Pekingese and Bulldog breeds will compete in Thursday evening’s Best in Group competitions at Crufts after they failed the new veterinary checks that have been introduced to the show. The Best of Breed award was not given to Pekingese, Palacegarden Bianca, or Bulldog, Mellowmood One In A Million, following their veterinary checks, which were carried out by an independent veterinary surgeon. This means that the dogs will not be allowed to continue into the Toy or Utility Best in Group competitions respectively. The Kennel Club has introduced veterinary checks for the Best of Breed winners at all Kennel Club licensed General and Group Championship Dog Shows from Crufts 2012 onwards, in 15 designated high profile breeds. This measure was introduced to ensure that Best of Breed awards are not given to any dogs that show visible signs of problems due to conditions that affect their health or welfare. The fifteen high profile breeds are as follows: Basset Hound, Bloodhound, Bulldog, Chow Chow, Clumber Spaniel, Dogue De Bordeaux, German Shepherd Dog, Mastiff, Neapolitan Mastiff, Pekingese, Shar Pei, St Bernard, French Bulldog, Pug and Chinese Crested. Caroline Kisko, Kennel Club Secretary, said: “We are determined to ensure that the show ring is a positive force for change and that we help to move breeds forward by only rewarding the healthiest examples of a breed. “The veterinary checks were introduced to ensure that dogs with exaggerated features do not win prizes. The independent veterinary surgeon decided that the Pekingese and Bulldog should not pass their checks and therefore they did not receive their Best of Breed awards and will not be representing their breeds in the remainder of the competition.”

Dogs, especially big dogs, are not rubber. Young dogs may suffer lifelong damage from drops on developing joints. It's great that the OP's dog seems to be ok, but please, don't assume big falls are safe. Physics says the impact is proportional to mass X velocity squared. A 40 kg dog will hit eight times harder than a 5 kg dog. Long ago, a dog I was walking off-lead (in a vast park that allowed off-lead dogs) fell ~8 m and ended out dead. Be careful.

Personally, I think this is a snobbish and ambiguous part of the code of ethics. I also think the attitude that often goes along with it is a major reason that pedigree registrations are falling and designer dogs are increasing in popularity. People want a good healthy dog, with predictable temperament and look. Not many want a show dog, and a lot of the people who think they want a show dog go to one show and decide it's not for them. You can rationalise most anything under the rubric of 'improving the quality and/or working ability of the breed'. For a lap dog, being a good pet may equate to being a good working dog! Try and breed away from extreme conformation for health reasons and avoid popular sires . . . say so openly, and you'll be in for a lot of criticism. Yes, yes, we get that you don't like pedigree dogs. You should have a 'repeat button'. I get that your reading comprehension is poor and that you don't like me. I breed pedigree dogs and am proud of the pedigrees behind my dogs. I do health testing. I screen buyers. I'm no longer breeding because the lovely pup I kept from the last litter (sire, via AI, a multiple BISS import with excellent temperament and good health stats) did poorly on hip/ebow screening and my old girl stopped having regular cycles. Yatta, yatta, yatta. I have major problems with the show ring as a decider of what is an 'improvement' in the breed. Show judging has done immense damage to the health, temperament, and working ability of many, many breeds. If breed fanciers response to people voicing anti-show sentiments is to attack the messenger, the decline of purebred/pedigree dogs and the rise of designer dogs and puppy farms is assured.

bounce Thanks for posting! Great product. Free international shipping. Notice that they have a lifetime replacement guarantee for the collars.

What business is the number of times a bitch can be bred of anyone but the breeder and the vet who KNOWS the bitch well? Most breeders have had bitches who struggled to have one or two litters and then were retired ..... and then the same breeders can a bitch who is bred now and then and loves to be a mother, is an excellent whelper, bounces back into good shape and can be exhibited in the show ring because she is in top shape and given plenty of time between litters. Souff was once pressured into retiring a bitch from breeding after she had a number of litters. She drove me crackers for the rest of her life because of false pregnancies and then, after she was spayed, because of her behaviour around puppies, pregnant bitches and other hormonal activity. NATURE DECREED THAT SHE WAS MEANT TO BE A MOTHER AND SHE WAS A BLOODY GOOD MOTHER! My vets and I agreed later that we should have allowed her to carry on for as long as she was a good natural whelper and feeder. Breeding was what suited her best and she delivered beautifully healthy pups. Straight after lactation she would spring back into shape and there were never any conception problems. Not all bitches are like her and the decision to continue to breed must be made on what is best for the individual bitch. Never again will I listen to anyone who tells me a bitch should be retired from breeding simply because she has had a number of litters! People who pressure other breeders over this can go to hell - it is not always in the bitch's best interests. Treat your bitches well, skip one or two seasons between litters and let them be in top shape when they breed. Let them do what nature intended and give them every possible assistance. Agree 100%. I can see forbidding double merle matings . . . it is cruel to knowingly cause the conception of pups fated to die blind and/or deaf. I can see limiting the number of litters a dog can sire in the interests of increasing genetic diversity. But what's the harm in allowing a broody bitch to have a fourth, or fifth . . . or if she's healthy and able, seventh brood?

Maybe changing attitudes among registered breeders to make it acceptable/respectable to breed healthy puppies for the pet market. If 'breed only to improve the breed' is interpreted narrowly, and people who do health checks, vaccinations, etc., continue to be shamed for not participating in competitions, there won't be enough pups for the huge number of families who simply want a healthy purebred with a known pedigree. If you can't get the pedigree dog you want, where do you go? If pedigree breeders can't or won't meet the demand for purebred pets, someone else is going to do it.

On this supermarket trolley nonsense . . . I'd say the complainers aren't showing that they don't like kids, they're showing that they're intolerant, self-righteous prudes. I sometimes eat things in the supermarket and have the checkers scan the packaging. I've asked if they mind. They say, no, it's fine. If the supermarket doesn't mind, why bitch about it? Supermarkets loose a lot more to people who take a five finger discount and walk out with some expensive gismo and a high-class steak in their pants than they do to people pacifying their toddlers. I'd guess that the screaming 2 yr old in the check out line is a much bigger negative to commerce than the Mum who allows the kid a treat while waiting at the counter. I'm not overtly Christian, but I remember a Jesus quote along the lines of : "It's easier to save 10,000 sinners than it is to save one righteous man." Hey, keep at it. Maybe we can get to 50 pages!

When threads run beyond 20 pages, they often wander away from the OT and bring in some emotional exchanges. So? As in much face-to-face communication, a lot on DOL is not true dialogue, but response to triggers. If someone says something that pushes your buttons, you respond to that statement. Deep listening is pretty rare in any format.

You might try putting up an add at on the bulletin board at Dogs West . . . there are lots of people who have trailers and don't use them that often. Never heard of commercial rentals in Perth.

Well they should buy up some of our agricultural land like many other countries are doing - we don't know how much has been sold off though because our wonderful government does not bother to keep a register. off topic . . . but inappropriate finger pointing needs to be noted: The Brazilian government has historically, hastened deforestation by building roads and making land grants. . . .like the Australian and US governments (to name a few), Actually, Brazilian land grants in the Amazon generally required that half the forest be left intact, though little was done to enforce the law. This is more than can be said for Oz or the US. The Brazilian government has not played a major direct role in deforestation. In the last decade (since Lula was elected), Brazil has made a lot of progress in decreasing the rate of deforestation, mostly by enforcing the law. As for land destruction, Australia has outpaced Brazil in causing extinctions and in land area cleared of woody vegetation. The rape of the southwest was not so dissimilar to Amazonian deforestation (or the clearing of savannah lands to the south and east of the Amazon). Main difference: more endemics in Australia and much more rapid land clearing. What was done, mostly, with chainsaws and machetes in Brazil was done with huge Catepillar dozers in Australia.

Given that people have been know to lie/cheat (eg, by substituting one dog for another), I don't think any lab that allows people to take their own swabs should be certified. For that matter, you could end out with false results just through poor record keeping . . . you don't need dishonesty. Someone has four or five dogs done at once and the labels get switched somewhere. There is a reason for certification procedures. Think of the harm that might be done if a popular sire was actually Optigen B and his test results came through as Optigen A.

Personally, I think this is a snobbish and ambiguous part of the code of ethics. I also think the attitude that often goes along with it is a major reason that pedigree registrations are falling and designer dogs are increasing in popularity. People want a good healthy dog, with predictable temperament and look. Not many want a show dog, and a lot of the people who think they want a show dog go to one show and decide it's not for them. You can rationalise most anything under the rubric of 'improving the quality and/or working ability of the breed'. For a lap dog, being a good pet may equate to being a good working dog! Try and breed away from extreme conformation for health reasons and avoid popular sires . . . say so openly, and you'll be in for a lot of criticism.

I've been true to one breed . . . thinking about switching cause I'm getting older and I am a little comfortable owning dogs I couldn't carry back home if something went wrong on a hike. Hope my next breed will hold me through for the rest of my life. Currently thinking Boston, as they are fairly common in the US and I like the temperament. I don't see how people cope with multiple breeds. Perhaps my social skills just aren't up to dealing with the ins-and-outs of breed clubs, politics, etc. for multiple breeds.

I'd say this is a good issue to use to attack the [stupid] ban on e-collars. I don't see how anyone can say it's inhumane to aversion train dogs to make them avoid snakes. Maybe push the RSPCA to do something useful and offer this sort of training! Nobody gains when a dog gets killed by a snake.

17'5 =LY 4M4Z1NG WH47 W3 C4N MIZUND3R574ND 1F W3 DONOT 7RY. DOL has a little of everything . . . people who shoot first and ask questions later, people who have trouble putting a paragraph together, people who express themselves well but can't spell, trolls, gospel-touters, skeptics, comics, people who are too serious, people who are a bit saccharine, people who are on the dry side, the occasional wacko. Not so different from the world in general.

I've been reading dog blogs lately. It's shocking how nasty people get. Maybe the deeper question is why so many animal lovers don't like other people? Do we have so many DA and HA dogs because there are lots of DA and HA owners?

To answer the question: If you think someone is breeding unethically, how about approaching them personally and finding out what they do and why they do it? Maybe you can teach them something . . . or maybe there's a reason for what they're doing, and they can teach you something. Backstabbing and policework are not effective tools for behaviour modification. Honest, non-judgemental communication does sometimes work.

A century ago, the kitchen was a sort of little factory . . . you couldn't buy ready made . . . many people made their own bread, canned fruits and veg, etc. The food industry expanded and took over a large share of the household tasks associated with food prep. Our food is probably more sanitary for this change, but I think it plays a major part in the syndrome of eating too much processed stuff, too little fresh food, and getting fat. That's progress for you. Gotta watch 'em, or the pet industry will push through the same sort of progress in dog breeding: Taking the job out of the home, insisting on sanitation and portraying the industry as an improvement; making home-bred dogs seem inferior, inconvenient.

My guys love their HeartGuard chewies. My vet says you can skip every other month and still break the life cycle of the parasite. With this strategy, oral is cheaper than the injection. The only snag is you must buy from a reputable source. Apparently there are some counterfeit meds showing up online.

I think the jury is still out on speying and health . . . Diva posted an interesting article in the 'studies about dogs' part of General Discussion (its in the 5th page of the topic). It was published in Aging Cell, a peer reviewed journal. The authors studied a large number of life histories for female Rottis . . . separating out the girls who were speyed young and those who were not speyed or speyed late in life. The results associate early speying with a 30% reduction in life expectancy! for the article see http://onlinelibrary...009.00513.x/pdf p.s., please don't take this as an endorsement for back yard breeding of unspeyed bitches. There are good reasons to spey.

bump

Agreed! The flatcoat and golden retriever would be one and the same breed but for people breeding for colour. . . . and black Labs would far outnumber yellows.

The various codes of conduct are subject to many interpretations. I can see policing welfare. I think it would be a big mistake to police 'improving the breed', and caution is required on 'striving to eliminate hereditary diseases'. One person may feel they are improving the breed by using a Gr Ch stud or line breeding on a particular dog. Another person may believe that the popular sire syndrome, and breeding for extreme conformation, are major causes of health decline in breed health/work performance. As for eliminating hereditary disease, one person may insist on testing for heterozygosity in the MHC/DLA, another may insist on MRI, another annual CERF . . . we'll be seeing many more options for genetic testing, some of which will be largely irrelevant for some breeds.

see, eg http://iditarod.com/ for official coverage http://www.alaskadispatch.com/slideshow/photos-iditarod-2012-begins-sunny-willow has good pictures On Sunday, years of preparation, trial and error, defeat and victory culminated on a frozen lake in tiny Willow, Alaska, about 70 miles north of the state’s largest city, where Iditarod XL was officially under way at 2 p.m. beneath breezy, baby-blue skies and in temperatures hovering around 10 degrees F. Thousands of people from across the state pulled into snow-choked parking lots early Sunday morning, while who knows how many thousands of others watched on glowing computer screens and high-definition TVs beyond. MORE: "Mushers stream out of Willow as the real Iditarod racing gets going" Should temperatures remain low and storms steer clear, mushers and dog teams may be in for another race contested at a blistering pace. Perhaps another speed record will fall, one year after John Baker of Kotzebue shattered the old race record by reaching Nome in just over eight days and 19 hours? Athletes to watch this year include Iditarod legends and upstarts. Everyone knows the fan favorites: two-time runner-up DeeDee Jonrowe from Willow; four-time Iditarod winner Lance Mackey of Fairbanks, who hopes to join Rick Swenson in the elite, five-time champion column. And then there are the Seaveys, another family whose name is as synonymous with Alaska dog mushing as the Redingtons. Dallas Seavey, 25, son of 2004 winner Mitch Seavey, is back along with Dallas' grandfather Dan. He will be leading an elite group of young guns that also includes Ryan and Ray Redington Jr., Rohn Buser, 22, and Pete Kaiser of Bethel, who finished an impressive eighth last year. Many former champs and Iditarod race watchers believe young Dallas, winner of the 2011 Yukon Quest International Sled Dog Race, has a chance at upsetting the veteran field -- a field that’s perhaps as deep and competitive as any in Iditarod history.