sandgrubber

Hell yeah what is there to consider? Their dog killed their baby. I wouldn't want that dog anywhere near me, if it was mine. RIP little baby If they are pro dog racers, it seems likely they will blame themselves . . . which I'd say is the correct assignment of blame . . . rather than the dog. The dog should not have been near the baby. Sled dogs are tough critters and not always gentle.

Not at all. Owners need to be prepared to things that don't go to script. If your dog is likely to use its teeth, be prepared to reign it in, and understand that you may end out in deep yoghurt if it bites a kid . . . even if the kid is a bit wacko and the Mum isn't being responsible at the moment. Kids outrank dogs when it comes to law. It's fine to swear at irresponsible Mums and out-of-control kids (both pretty common, sigh). Swear away. But you don't want to end out in court after your dog has chewed up someone's little darling. In law, dogs are property. Humans have rights that are protected by law.

Agreed. But it a few million spent on ads doesn't improve the product one iota. Repeat. Enjoy the ad, but don't let it influence you. Business is business. But rational decision making ignores ads and looks only at value and price. Adds play on your emotions, which are not going to lead to better purchasing decisions. Be rational.

I don't think this service (subset of general forum) is functioning well. Toxicity and the question of 'what kills you in the long term' are very different quesions. My parent both lived to 75 yrs plus, and both died of cancer. If they had died at 60 yrs, the cause of death would have been different. It would be better if this section of the forum was used to report acute toxicity. Eg, my dog had fits after applying such-and-such a drug or pesticide. That is REALLY interesting...and very scary!!

Great viewing. BUT It would be interesting to know how much Purina spent to make that ad and get it viewed on prime time. I don't consider myself a conspiracy theorist. But I think there's a huge body of evidence that the big guys who produce dog food, meds, etc., can produce some very appealing ads and use them to increase their profits. Bottom line. Appreciate the add. But don't let it influence your dog food purchases.

This survey needs an 'other' category. It doesn't get very hot here and my dogs almost always come with me when I go off premises. They're happy to spend a few hours in the car. When they hear the engine fire they come running so they can come along.

Amazing video. Thanks for posting. I've watched street dogs in Brazil (where they are callled 'can lickers') and think that the cruel natural selection that happens on the street produces some amazing dogs. Elsie seems like a great dog . . . very maternal . . . intelligent . . . adaptable . . .

Wonderful videos. Thanks for posting. Those GSD's don't look at all like a modern show GSD! The difference is spectacular. I hope some GSD people will comment.

Yup. These work great for some dogs. The crunch whack scrumple sound they make when they play with them seem to be a reward. For some dogs, especially in summer, it's good to hang these from a rope and fill them with water. The result is that they thump hard but not hard enough to damage when the dog pushes them around (many dogs love the thump) and they spout water when the dog succeeds in getting them in its grips. The water spout is another reward for some dogs.

Homeopathy works for me. Although I don't use wormers nor flea treatments. Been no need to. Haven't had a flea issue and instead of filling my dog with chemicals to get rid of worms that aren't there, I have had periodic faeces tests done. I haven't done a comparison but I'd suggest it's worked out the same price if not cost me less than it would have to purchase the worming medication every quarter. And, as it turns out, each worm burden count done on the faeces has proved negative, so I'm glad I haven't been filling his belly full of dog wormers. ETA: And the suggestion that we aren't harming our dogs? How do we know? On the homeopathy debate: there's a great documentary to look at it. see, eg, http://topdocumentar...omeopathy-test/ clip from that site: Homeopathy was pioneered over 200 years ago. Practitioners and patients are convinced it has the power to heal. Today, some of the most famous and influential people in the world, including pop stars, politicians, footballers and even Prince Charles, all use homeopathic remedies. Yet according to traditional science, they are wasting their money.Skeptic James Randi is so convinced that homeopathy will not work, that he has offered $1m to anyone who can provide convincing evidence of its effects. For the first time in the programme's history, Horizon conducts its own scientific experiment, to try and win his money. If they succeed, they will not only be $1m richer – they will also force scientists to rethink some of their fundamental beliefs. The bottom line, if you watch the doco or follow other attempts to test the scientific validity of homeopathy, is that it is a crock. Prayer is just as effective. On the other hand, both homeopathy and prayer fulfill the first dictate of the Hippocratic Oath: they do no harm. That may not be true of some of the medications we commonly use on dogs. The fact that homeopathic cures seem to work for many people is evidence that we over-medicate. If a 'do-nothing' medicine seems to work, there was no need to medicate. My father was a doctor. One of the things he said was nice about being a doctor was that fact that most complaints resolve themselves within two weeks . . . thus any 'cure' he prescribed was likely to work. Homeopathic medicines are a great placebo. There may be some exceptions. Calendula cerate, a homeopathic remedy, is great for burns and wounds. But the normal homeopathic routine about diluting and diluting and diluting to get extremely weak solutions has not been validated by scientific testing . . . despite many efforts to validate it.

You've got a great topic there. The dog bite/attack question is a great one for pointing out biases and the effects of how data are handled (eg, normalising the data by the number of dogs). You also need to be careful about definitions. In many US areas, Staffies, Staffie X's and some other bull breeds are considered pit bulls. You should find it pretty easy to see that there are strong sentiments on both sides of the debate. Also, beware of any comments without documentation. Eg, the Labrador Retriever, not the Golden Retriever, is the most common pedigree dog in Canada, and has been for many years. Neither breed shows up as important in Canadian dog bite statistics. YOu also have to be cautious about the definition of 'bite'. Minor bites of kids by the family dog usually don't get reported, but some sources count them. It's rare for sources to differentiate bites that had 'cause' . . . eg, dogs that bite children who torture them. I have taught stats at Uni level . . . I would advise against trying to get to the 'truth' on this one. Much better to use it as a demonstration of how hard it can be to determine the truth.

I disagree, no need to be snotty to anyone, popular breed or not. I agree . . . no need to be snotty, and it's ugly to do so. I said such breeders can afford to be snotty. Might also note that breeders with much sought-after pups often get frayed around the edges by getting several phone calls and emails a day. It would be good if they were uniformly polite to callers, but that doesn't always happen. As is occasionally pointed out in these forums, some doggy people have better dog skills than people skills. The puppy buyers with better etiquette are more likely to get a pup where pups are much in demand.

I'd guess there is no genetic test, and it would be good to have more information from the vet opthamologist . . . not filtered by a journalist . . .to make any pronouncement about what happened here. I did do some research regarding testing but everything goes out the window when you start dealing with 'Labtrevers'....... What goes out the window? Golden x Labradors can be CERF'd. See http://www.vmdb.org/hybridinfo.html With respect to genetic testing for hereditary eye disease, Labs and Goldies both get tested for cPRA . . . same test . . . same gene . . . but PRA isn't a cataract and doesn't show up in neonates.

The market, and the appropriate strategy for placing pups, varies between breeds. If you've got Bostons or Frenchies, and have a dozen interested buyers for every pup you can produce, you can afford to be a bit snotty about how would-be puppy buyers approach you. If you've got one of those breeds where its hard to find appropriate homes (I'm thinking of someone who had a litter of 10 Afghans and ended out keeping 8 of them because they could not find proper homes), its a different story.

There are many ways a dog can end out blind. There are genetic tests to rule out blindness caused by a recessive gene (PRA, where the RA stands for retinal atrophy . . . which affects the retina, while cataracts affect the lens. My favorite Lab health site, Wing-And-Wave Labradors, says the following about cataracts: http://www.labbies.com/eye.htm Cataracts The lens is the part of the eye which functions to bring objects to correct focus on the retina. A cataract is any opacity occurring in the lens affecting its transparency. In most cases the formation of cataracts is associated with abnormal water and calcium content within the lens substance. Causes for these abnormal chemical levels range from environmental, to metabolic, to hereditary, and can occur during the development of the lens (developmental cataracts) or be a result of degenerative changes after development has occurred (degenerative cataracts). Severity of the disorder ranges from non-progressive and slight, in which there may be no interference with vision, to progressive, in which there is a slow and gradual loss of transparency. Age of onset: Birth to 6 years; senile cataracts (those associated with old-age) present in dogs at 9-10 yrs of age. Symptoms: Bluish-white or milky appearance of the lens; blurred vision. Treatment: Many dogs are able to see quite well despite the existence of lens opacities. There is no current method for treatment of cataracts other than surgical removal. There are two common techniques for cataract removal: 1) extracapsular extraction in which the lens capsule is opened and the lens is expressed through the opening, or 2) intracapsular extraction in which the entire lens and capsule is removed. The extracapsular method is usually the preferred method because it imposes less risks of secondary complications to the patient; however, the intracapsular method yields better visual results in the patient. I'd guess there is no genetic test, and it would be good to have more information from the vet opthamologist . . . not filtered by a journalist . . .to make any pronouncement about what happened here.

Exactly. Biting dogs are not flavour of the month. That's why it's more useful to be prepared to do a bit of defensive dog walking than to worry who is at fault. The Law gives kids a much higher status than dogs. . . . and you cannot count on sympathy if your dog bites some stranger's kid. No more than you can count on sympathy if you hit a kid who runs out in front of your car. btw, Kudos to the OP . .. who is absolutely right in calling it a Tricky Scenario. It is tricky. Unless you score high on psychopath tests, you should be able to feel sympathy for both the dog walker and the Mum. Good that this potential conflict got headed off.

I once had a GSD-oriented friend who found a source of second hand conveyer belts and cut them up for the dogs. His destroyed most toys, including Jolly balls and Cuz balls, in no time. The conveyer belting stood up pretty well. I like to give cheap paint rollers (not used) to mine. The fiberousness slows them down, and at a few bucks a pop, who cares if they get destroyed fairly quickly.

I think I just fell in love with you for this comment. I'm sure some 'bloody parents' have thought in their darker moments that they'd like their kids PTS. But that would carry a murder charge. And you never know what psychiatrist is advising them to allow the kid to venture out and make a few mistakes . . . as a necessary part of coming to live a semi-independent life. Your dog is simply a possession with no rights . . . you are entitled to do some fairly extreme things to keep it in control, and to have it pts if it proves uncontrollable. Or are you a believer in animal rights? I think people need to think less about blame and more about solutions. My heart goes out to a Mum who has 24/7 duties to take care of a kid with autism or other serious disability. I'd go stark raving mad . . . or take to the bottle in a serious way. If you have a dog that is likely to bite, how about accepting that the perfect parent has yet to be found and some people are less in control of their kids than you would like. Sometimes you have to do a bit of defensive dog walking. So?

So sad! Sorry to hear your little one has such a grim prognosis. You've gotten many great suggestions and I have nothing to add . . . other than to say, don't worry, and don't feel guilty if she doesn't eat. It sounds like she has some awful things going on in her digestive tract, and if she prefers not to eat, there may be good reason.

I'm not in QLD . . . but I think giving victims of dog attacks greater rights to compensation is the most interesting bit in the measured discussed. I think they're asking the wrong question . . . they should be asking how owners should be classified.

GREAT NAMES!!!!

If there's an award for owner-of-the-year, I'd be happy to nominate you or vote for you. Lovely thing you're doing.

My own private theory about dog domestication is that the bedwarmer effect played an important role in the original domestication (or should we call it symbiosis). The cavemen didn't exactly have central heating. Having something that was 2 degrees C warmer than you willing to curl up at your feet would have been a big plus . . . especially during glaciations where temperature got colder and colder . . . and a dry, semi-warm, protected cave with some food handouts would have been a good deal for the proto-dogs.

Ok . . . if you don't think Lootie was a good representative of the breed, try Ah Chum, who is preserved via taxadermy, at the Walter Rothschild Zoological Museum in the village of Tring -- about 30 miles Northwest of London. This dog is widely regarded as the 'Adam' of the breed. I'd also recommend the document from which I clipped this photo . . . which comes from a Peke insider and makes a pretty strong case that the modern (as of 1989) Peke is a breed created by dog fanciers from a mixture of Chinese sources . . . and that Chinese dog breeding practices were not consistent with purebred as we use the word today. The Pekingese and The Happa Dog . . . A few extracts from that source. He is reflecting on early specimens of Chinese dogs displayed in the museum: "If I expected to learn something about the history of Pekingese by seeing the founding sire of the breed, Ah Cum, it was the Happa dog that was the eye-opener --- because the Happa dog's type, proportion and overall construction were far more familiar to me as a Peke breeder and appeared far more like the Pekingese we know today than the breed's well documented patriarch standing next to him. There are a number of good accounts of breeding activity of the early Pekingese breeders in England and America, though one thing always remained unclear. People wondered how British breeders -- who are credited with a major role in developing the modern Pekingese -- were able to produce a compact, barrel chested, heavily coated Peke with short, heavy boned, well bowed forelegs using late 19th and early 20th century breeding stock that was more upstanding, often with longer, narrow bodies, with little or no bow whatsoever in their forelegs. The assumption had always been that Pekingese breeders of yesteryear developed the breed "from within" -- through inbreeding -- which allegedly produced atavism, or “throwbacks” to hidden characteristics. Or the thinking was, perhaps there were mutations which could explain the expression of some traits and the evolution of the breed's appearance. Nobody ever really questioned it. But a more logical, even obvious, answer to the mystery lies hidden in the Rothschild Museum in Tring with the ancient Happa dog "Ta-Jen" whose "Pekingesey" characteristics are more typical, more recognizable, and positively more likely than the breed's recorded patriarch, Ah Cum. The Happa dog exhibits typical traits for the breed as we know it today. He has the correct body shape for a modern Pekingese with barrel rib and is low to ground. He has a bowed front, not straight forelegs like Ah Cum presented next to him for comparison. The Happa's broad shallow head, large wideset eyes and earset level with the topskull are more typical of a modern Pekingese than Ah Cum. The obvious atypical traits are the Happa's short tail and faulty tail carriage. But these are anomalies that remain a remote factor in the modern Pekingese gene pool and represent traits that can be improved or “corrected” in one generation. From my perspective as a longtime Pekingese breeder, seeing the Happa dog was like "coming home" and filled in a key missing piece of the Pekingese evolutionary puzzle. ... According to one of the most definitive and highly respected sources on the history of Asian dogs, Dogs of China and Japan in Nature and Art by V.W.F. Collier, published early 20th century, the term "Happa Dog" was used by the Chinese for virtually any small lap dog of any breed. "Happa" was the Manchu word for "limp, or roll in the walk," with of course the roll (hopefully not the limp) being regarded as typically characteristic of the Pekingese gait. If we delve into the breeding practices of the Chinese eunuchs and Buddhist monks who for centuries were responsible for producing valued characteristics in dogs and cats in palaces and monasteries, it's clear these breeders freely practiced crossbreeding. For example, Collier states in his writings "In China, the breed (Shih Tzu) is nowadays sometimes crossed with Pekingese with a view to introducing length of coat to that breed. Then too, in Britain in 1952, a Kennel Club sanctioned Peke/Shih Tzu cross was conducted officially for the purpose of modifying Shih Tzu breed type. As we all know, breeds were created and improved through crossbreeding, so it's no stretch of the imagination to presume that official Peke/Shih Tzu cross -- which took place over several generations -- very likely produced crossbreds that quietly made their way into the hands of clever Peke breeders who, looking for a competitive edge, easily added longer coat to future generations of show stock, albeit off the record. . . . When the Asian breeds first began their regular influx into Britain in the mid 19th century, these dogs were a miscellaneous mixture of a number of breeds. So British breeders were accustomed to this and clearly had their work cut out for them in sorting out the traits and genes. In China there was no taboo associated with continual crossbreeding and of course the practice produced a variety of types. It's understandable then why the Chinese would have been inclined to use a generic, catch-all term such as "Happa" for a small lap dog of any kind. The distinction between breeds in many instances would have been blurred, and even some of the best dogs which approached the ideal would not have necessarily bred true, although it was said the Japanese Spaniel was more likely to breed true than the Pekingese. Because the Asian culture is steeped in mysticism, one of the highest priorities in breeding in ancient China was the production of dogs with special markings which had symbolic significance and great value. In particular, the white forehead blaze was highly prized as “a superior mark of Buddha,” which the Chinese called "a little ball shining like snow between the eyebrows." It could be for this reason alone that many of the dogs depicted in ancient Chinese artwork exhibit parti-color traits which Ta-Jen also exhibits.

Not to mention professional handlers. Here's from the website of they guy who handled Malachy. http://www.pequest.com/ProfessionalHandling.htm