sandgrubber

Unfortunately "puppy farm" is often a slanderous term that people throw around when they don't like the way a dog breeder is operating. It is essentially an "N' word used in the dog world. A well run large kennel is e a great place, form the dog's perspective. Dogs are social animals. Most love the company of other dogs and if they're allowed to run and play with a regular small pack, they love it. You could argue that it's cruel to keep dogs as singletons, cause they don't get to interact with their own kind. Sure, if you want a house dog, you are better starting a puppy off in the house. But a good breeder, of any scale, interacts a lot with the pups. A very large establishment is likely to have someone on full-time to look after the pups, and will do such things as keep a radio on and having a washing machine in the background. Do you think a woman with a full time job and a hubby that works away is going to be able to give pups as much attention? There are a handful of large scale, highly commercial dog breeding facilities that keep costs down by neglecting the dogs. Such establishments have deservedly been raked over the coals because they neglect their dogs. There were some absolutely horrific things going on in commercial dog breeding establishments in certain US states, though I think legislation now has resulted in correction of the worse cases. There may be a few pretty ugly establishments in Australia. If they are, they're big targets, and could be put out of business by effective enforcement of existing laws. I wish the animal rights people would put more energy into protecting the right to live of the poor dogs who happen to 'look' dangerous.

Fuller description can be found at http://www.nhregister.com/articles/2011/10/01/news/doc4e8672133b2e6645944751.txt?viewmode=fullstory This case is nothing like the Victorian case. The baby was on the floor, unattended (apparently) and the dogs got out of another room. An aunt was looking after the little girl. Reader comments tell a further story aurie wrote on Sep 30, 2011 10:33 PM:" I'm betting the owner(s) of those dogs have rap sheets involving drugs, burglary, or violence. They should be prosecuted for animal cruelty. 3 energetic pit bulls shouldn't be confined to an apartment. Third floor? Odds are good that they didn't get walked often - too much trouble. Maybe people should be required to get dog-owners' licenses that have to be renewed every so often. These folks aren't fit to own dogs, and no parent should take a child around that many dogs in an apartment. If those dogs were properly raised and trained, and closely supervised, this never would have happened. Poor dogs. Sorry owners. Poor little girl. " Neighborhood mess wrote on Sep 30, 2011 11:30 PM: " This whole neighborhood is turning into a ghetto. I have a friend (wish she'd move) who unfortunatley lives on the next street. This whole neighborhood is loaded with pit-bulls and other attack dogs. The absentee landlords that live elsewhere are also to blame. Most of these drug dealing, pitbull owning thugs have police records and the owners don't care anymore. Just get that apartment rented..who cares cause I don't live in West Haven anyway. The owner of the house is responsible, the owner of the dogs are responsible and most of all this little baby girl's parents are responsible. She didn't have a chance. She was surrounded by idiots. God bless her and may she rest in peace. Poor little innocent angel, what a horrible way to die. Thug brand dogs for thug brain owners. West Haven should enforce some new zoning rules, three family homes should not have that many crazy dogs in it anyway. Where do you think all that waste from them ends up? Oh those poor sanitation workers. Mayor Picard, man up and do the right thing. That whole neighborhood is dangerous now..either no dogs in an apartment, or limit how many killer dogs in one apartment. "

Yes, you did. But it doesn't hurt to repeat the time and place every time you mention an event. People don't remember where, in six pages of a thread, they saw something, and Search can be tedious. Also, a lot of people don't do Facebook, or try to avoid it.

Sorry, I cut and pasted this from the Facebook page cause it frustrates me when people post events and don't provide time and place. The paste didn't exactly work Should read: TAS - Parliament House . . . with no link, then SA on the next line. The main Facebook link is at: http://www.facebook....275080639183977 QLD is still listed as TBA and TAS still listed as Parliament House with no link.

??? I don't think idiot irresponsible owners intended to bring this on. They were just doing their dumb ass macho bloodthirsty thing without regard to the consequences. If responsible owners had been more involved in enforcing control on those who prefer mean dogs and don't properly train or socialise, this awful mess might have been avoided. Governments generally aren't very smart unless they get input from people on the ground who know what is going on. I believe it is a mix and have said many times on here that you only have to look at some of the amstaff breeder adverts on here to see what some of them are breeding and the type they're after.. of course it's going to appeal to the bogan spectrum. Maybe I'm dense, but I still don't get it. There are 39 Am Staff puppy adverts on DOL today. A few (3 or 4) make a big deal of well muscled and big boned with big heads . . . but I'd find similar language describing Labradors. . . some of those advertizing muscle, head and bone also boast Ch/Gr Ch lines. Some people like dogs with big heads and conspicuous muscle. Not necessarily bogan. One bragging about how heavy their studs are, which seems a little weird, but you'll find odd stuff in puppy ads for any common breed.

Some people don't listen. It's usually easier to move on than to convince someone who doesn't want to hear. I breed Labbies and have fielded many questions from people with autistic kids. I hope I've generally responded kindly and am more inclined to say yes than no. But, have to say, it's complicated. Some kids seem more to need something to hug and learn that it's ok to touch . . . and generally develop sympathetic responses. Some kids need a dog that can withstand rough play (no malice, but also, not much empathy) and hyperactivity without striking back at the kid. With a 3 yr old, I imagine you're still figuring out the child's unfolding personality. It may be useful, both to you, and to people who you might approach to sell you a pup or adult dog, to outline the way you envision your son interacting with 'his' dog. btw, Labs are often recommended because many (not all) of them are bomb proof. They tend to have high pain thresholds, high bite inhibition, strong ability to take cues from human body language, and a sort of broody/nurturing nature. This may not be the best thing for your son. But I think it brings up traits you need to consider in choosing a companion to help your son through early development.

In answer to the question, does BSL reduce attack rates. The answer is simple. NO. I'll be happy to eat my words and apologize if you can provide any evidence that BSL (other than import bans, which I, personally, support) has a positive effect. I support import bans, mainly, because there are some breeds out there with high-drive, strong guarding instinct and low bite inhibition. The current mess with regard to the APBT would be much worse if there were a bunch of fila's, dogo's, etc. around, producing hybrid pups. If that were the case, it wouldn't just be AmStaff and SBT x owners in fear. The entire molasser spectrum, and anything vaguely resembling the (quite rare) Tosa. The current witch hunt would be uglier if there were more types of witches.

I think this if barking up the wrong tree. I played around with the Vic 'standard' and found that it copies from various APBT descriptions, adds illustrations, and changes words here and there. True. You could call it plagiarism or unauthorized use of material. You could blow a bunch of money suing for miss-use of intellectual property or something like that. If you got the right lawyer and were lucky with the jury you might win a civil law suit. BFD. The politico's would rewrite the same garbage in their own words and come up with an equally horrific standard. The BIG problem is the idea of using a visual description to decide which dog is going to be dangerous, and which is not dangerous, is laughably stupid. And the consequences are not the least bit laughable. The BIGGER problem is that the public thinks this idiotic law is doing something to make them safer. Sorry. It isn't. And it's causing a huge amount of grief to people who have ended up owning a dog who has the wrong look.

Curious . . . I'd think they'd be using foetal stem cells for allogenic . . . you wouldn't have right to life opposition to using foetal tissue from bitches speyed while preggers. Good to hear this is working and that tissue acquisition is reasonably simple.

The equivalent of sanitary napkins for dogs. More like pampers with a tail hole.

Given that the Lab and SBT are #1 and #2 pedigree dogs in Australia, and given that SBT's are notorious for fence climbing, I'd guess the SBT x Lab is one of the most common mixes in Australia. Lots of 'em show up in pounds and boarding kennels. Many but not all of the X's end out with floppy ears, and thus probably won't be bagged as pit bull look alikes. How stupid can you get. If a pup gets the erect ear gene, it's dangerous. If not, it's safe.

Elysia looks sweet . . . wonderful eyes. I hope your friend appreciates your help . . . and can be brought around to taking your and the vet's advice. Sounds like puppies would be a very bad idea in any case, and doubly bad in that you cannot know anything about the sire. If he is SBT or AmStaff, there's a chance that the pups will be vulnerable to seizure under Vic's dangerous dog laws.

I haven't seen a photo of the dog who killed Ayen Chol and have heard very little about its background. I don't know why this information hasn't been made public. At times he (the dog) has been described as a pit bull x mastiff, in which case there is a good chance he wouldn't have been outlawed by the Victorian standard because the pit bull x mastiff types are often bigger than pits, have hanging skin, and un-pit bull type ears. I've read the same stories as you and think it quite possible that the owner encouraged the behaviour that lead to Ayen Chol's death. I've watched people encourage their dogs to show aggression to dark skinned people. I think doing so should be a criminal offense. I never said you can make any dog aggressive. The slightest sign of aggression will get a dog removed from the gene pool in some breeds . . . at least with a good breeder. You'd have to work very hard to turn a guide dog puppy into a schutz dog . . . and if you succeeded it would probably be via teaching the dog that biting the man in the padded suit is a game. There are high drive dogs with low bite thresholds who are bred and raised to go for blood . . . the traits that make a dog dangerous are to some degree hereditary. There is a good market for macho dogs (internationally) among people who fancy themselves big game hunters, and among dog fighters. Some lines of pit bull are much fancied by these groups, because the pit tends to be a tough, tenacious, fearless dog. Some people are deliberately crossing pits from high drive lines with large/giant breeds to get bigger, badder dogs. I would be all for a law written to focus on this type of person and their dogs, though I would prefer to see good policing and very heavy fines, including manslaughter charges when a dog kills. Any such law needs to respect the rural population, who may need big dogs for stock guarding or hunting feral pigs and / or dogs. The existence of high drive and low bite threshold in SOME dogs from a certain breed does not make the entire breed dangerous. What happens if the next killing is done by some cross that doesn't include or look like an APBT . . . say, for example, an ACD x bulldog (both tough, fearless breeds). Do we expand the ban to include all ACD's and all bulldogs? Who's next? I live in a California town where the majority of the people are Hispanic, and the most common dog types are pit bulls and chihuahuas (I say type, cause few dogs are on any sort of pedigree register). The vast majority of the pitties are good family dogs . . . no more dangerous than the average Staffie. Breed is not the problem. Breeding dogs to be weapons is, especially in urban and suburban settings.

??? I don't think idiot irresponsible owners intended to bring this on. They were just doing their dumb ass macho bloodthirsty thing without regard to the consequences. If responsible owners had been more involved in enforcing control on those who prefer mean dogs and don't properly train or socialise, this awful mess might have been avoided. Governments generally aren't very smart unless they get input from people on the ground who know what is going on.

The Victorian abomination doesn't even qualify as 'breed' specific. It's pure, simple, overt discrimination based on appearance. I do believe that you can breed aggression up or down in dogs . . . and many breeders do so. Fortunately, most work to get aggression down. I'm in favour of putting pressure on those who want to up the aggression levels, particularly in suburbs/cities. Such people have many breeds they could work with . . . aggressive tendencies isn't unique to any breed. Victoria's stupid, stupid law doesn't focus on the guys who promote aggression. Instead it works on the patently false premise that appearance predicts behaviour. Absolutely whacko, crazy, nuts! Many bull-breed type dogs who are endangered by this law, are waggy little monsters, who may be a danger to your shoes, and who might knock a kid down trying to lick his/her face, but pose no real danger to anyone. To top it off, the new laws put little or no pressure on the guys who are legitimate targets. If you've already moved on from an APBT to some sort of molasser x APBT x meanest-dog-around pigdog, you're home free cause your dog won't look like the Vic 'standard'. And everyone - we all collectively need to understand that the current situation should be regarded as one which can and will affect dogs outside of the breeds of which you speak. So my suggestion is that people stop thinking of it as a "breed" specific legislation (even though it remains titled as such) and think of it as a set of laws that give a loose discription and any dog fitting the criteria of that description is "IT" as far as targetting is concerned. This law could affect YOUR best canine friend, or at least one that you know that you least expected could possibly be held accountable just because it comprised of physical attributes the Government listed in its laws. Click to enlarge :

Another bump plus contact info. There are rallies in different places . . . all on same date. Time Saturday, October 22 · 11:00am - 2:00pm Location Please see Info for your states / locations VIC- http://www.facebook....125666524199579 ... Shepparton VIC - http://www.facebook....152592708165545 NSW - http://www.facebook....if_t=event_wall QLD - TBA TAS - Parliment House SA - http://www.facebook....212241712171640 WA - http://www.facebook....252916974746646 (Copied from the Facebook announcement).

Another bump plus contact info. There are rallies in different places . . . all on same date. Time Saturday, October 22 · 11:00am - 2:00pm Location Please see Info for your states / locations VIC- http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=125666524199579 ... Shepparton VIC - http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=152592708165545 NSW - http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=292379974109432&view=wall¬if_t=event_wall QLD - TBA TAS - Parliment House SA - http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=212241712171640 WA - http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=252916974746646

Good to see some empathy. My dogs aren't bull breeds, and I'm not in Victoria. It seems to me that, because we love our own dogs, we should stand together and do what we can to help those unfortunates who are now trying to protect their best friends from this outrageous law. btw. People who bought a pup before Sept 2010 get hit just as badly as those who bought after. It's now too late to register. I feel especially bad for people who rescued a cross breed who looks too much like an APBT to their local ranger.

Wonderful that you got the girl back. Very likely she's prego. Even if your roommate isn't keen on desexing, it's worth taking her to the vet and discussing options and making sure she's ok. In many areas of Australia there's more demand for Lab pups than the market can supply . . . so if she's got good temperament, good confirmation, and good health credentials . . . and on Main Register . . . and some one wants to breed from her someday . . .there may be reasons to keep her entire. But a litter of oops puppies is not going to be a bonus! (In my experience, scolding people usually ends out with them doing exactly the opposite of what you want them to do).

The new Law is in the form of amendments to the the Domestic Animals Act of 1994 . . . so you have to put the amendments into context of the legislation they amend to read them correctly. Below is what was passed. I doubt it gives right of entry. But I would not be surprised if some gung ho enforcers in some shires go door to door asking to do something like 'check your dog'. There is an associated Bill, which I think is still awaiting a signature from the Queen's representative, which roughly quadruples penalties if your dangerous or menacing dog kills or endangers someone. The latter is clear as mud. It's entirely couched in terms of 'penalty units'. You gotta know something about Victorian law to make sense of it. see http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/vic/bill/cadaaaapb2011542.txt/cgi-bin/download.cgi/download/au/legis/vic/bill/cadaaaapb2011542.txt Domestic Animals Amendment (Restricted Breeds) Act 2011† No. 39 of 2011 [Assented to 31 August 2011] The Parliament of Victoria enacts: 1 Purpose The main purpose of this Act is to make further provision with respect to the keeping of restricted breed dogs. 2 Commencement This Act comes into operation on 30 September 2011. Authorised by the Chief Parliamentary Counsel 1 Domestic Animals Amendment (Restricted Breeds) Act 2011 No. 39 of 2011 3 Approval of standard (1) In section 3(3) of the Domestic Animals Act 1994, for "a standard prescribed by the regulations" substitute "an approved standard". (2) After section 3(3) of the Domestic Animals Act 1994 insert— "(4) For the purposes of subsection (3) an approved standard is a standard that has been approved by the Minister and published in the Government Gazette.". 4 Limitations on registration of restricted breed dogs For section 17(1A) of the Domestic Animals Act 1994 substitute— "(1A) A Council may register a dog as a restricted breed dog if— (a) the dog was in Victoria immediately before the commencement of the Domestic Animals Amendment (Dangerous Dogs) Act 2010; and (b) the dog was registered in Victoria immediately before the commencement of the Domestic Animals Amendment (Restricted Breeds) Act 2011. Note Under sections 10A(4) and 10C(6), a Council cannot register a restricted breed dog unless the dog is desexed (subject to the exception under section 10B(1)(e)) and the dog has been implanted with a prescribed permanent identification device.".

Worth adding, behaviour at home may be different from behaviour away from home or on the street. Many studies have shown non-neutered males are more prone to aggression. And if you ever work in a boarding kennel, you will find they are much more likely to mark walls, beds, other dogs . . . and their pee smells worse.

Lost dog found 3,000 miles from home in Brandon Published : Friday, 30 Sep 2011, 8:00 AM EDT BRANDON, Fla. - They say every dog has his day, and it was Cooper’s turn last week. The small Chihuahua disappeared from his home in California nearly two years ago, but last week, two people found him wandering the streets of Brandon. Cooper was taken to a local animal hospital. He was checked for a HomeAgain microchip and the hospital found one. That's how they were able to track down his family, which lives nearly 3,000 miles away. No one is sure how Cooper traveled such a long distance. The owners were happy to hear Cooper was still alive and well. They will be reunited with the dog Monday.

Talking with the practice owner is a good idea. I would be thinking lawsuit if this happened to me. If anyone should be paying for a refund, it's the vet practice. PTS'ing on the basis of a poor quality Xray is malpractice of the worst sort.

Time will tell. Meanwhile, my heart goes out to those who have to worry about whether their much loved family members will be executed.

With Labbies, being neutered or entire doesn't make a big difference, apart from the obvious (coming into season . .. having balls, etc). Entire boys and girls are more reactive when a girl comes into season. But on the whole, the differences between individual dogs' temperaments are much greater than the differences of before/after spey/neuter. Lots of people believe that it's harder to keep a spayed female slim, but in my experience, the task is equally difficult for an entire female. I think there are misconceptions because people confuse the effects of maturation (younger dogs and bitches are more likely to be entire) with those of desexing.