sandgrubber

If the 'breeder' can't provide proof of vaccination or sustain the claim of 'pure bred' by providing papers, I'd say good on the courts. He or she deserves a kick in the wallet. I see this as a highly efficient way of ridding the dog world of shonky breeders.

news.com.au appears to have pretty low journalistic standards. I suggest refraining from further discussion until State Agriculture Minister Peter Walsh introduces new offences to the Crimes Act in parliament. I'm tired of kicking dead horses.

So sorry you are confussed. One person's puppy farm is another person's prestige kennel. If you define anyone who makes a profit breeding dogs as a 'puppy farmer', I refuse to condemn puppy farmers. And there are some 'puppy farms' that I greatly admire. Doing a good job breeding dogs is demanding work, and those who devote their lives to it deserve to make a profit. Importing quality stock, maintaining breeding standards, keeping quality facilities, properly socialising pups, screening puppy buyers, etc. is expensive. Hobby breeders who subsidise their efforts from the income from a well-paying job cannot carry the whole burden. It might be nice if there were a landed gentry who carried all the costs of sustaining and improving breeds as part and parcel of being noblility, but these guys are long gone. I am happy to jump on any breeder who doesn't do health testing, uphold basic veterinary standards, allow dogs to exercise, consider sire and dam's temperament in doing breeding, maintain critical hygene standards, and generally act in an ethical fashion . . . regardless if they are a pedigree dog breeder, elite kennel, BYB, alleged puppy, family breeder, hobby breeder, or whatever other terms you choose to use. The lady in question has been campaigning for a long time and doesn't seem to have much success in stopping 'puppy farms' or the practice of selling pups in pet shops. I get the feeling she's dodgy, and has done more harm than good.

I live in the US now, but I owned a boarding kennel in WA and also bred dogs for many years. No question there are some horrible puppy farms. No question also that there are some horrible pedigree breeders, and some horrible BYB's. True in the US as well as Australia. There are rural areas all around the world where dogs are farmed, much as pigs are. I would like to see abuse of dogs ended, and support exposure of the low-grade puppy farms, wherever they are. There have been some shocking doco's on Amish dog breeding farms in Pennsylvania, which are permitted by law. What I don't support is tarring everyone with the same brush. But to the best I can determine, some in the animal rights crowd call many breeders 'puppy farmers', including breeders that a majority of DOL people would regard as quality breeders. Some segment of the animal rights crew would shut down all breeders who have more than a certain number of dogs, and in general, make life very difficult for large kennels . . . including many excellent breeders who maintain standards of hygine, veterinary care, health checking, exercise, etc that are well above average. They tend to be more accepting of the practice of having a litter or two out of the family dog, whether it be pedigree or X-breed, with or without health checks. The animal rights crowd is diverse, as are dog breeders. I do not mean to tar THEM all with the same brush. But I am bothered that the story about Oscar, as presented in the news article, is self-contradictory, and my attempt to verify the story made those contradictions look worse, not better.

If you want a cast iron guarantee of no HD, buy a young adult dog that's been scored. If you want a puppy that's less likely to get HD, choose a breed that scores low for that issue. If you want a Lab, research research research, buy one from generations of low scoring dogs and keep it lean, don't stuff it full of puppy kibble so it grows slowly, don't let it run around like a mad thing and dont walk it on lead until its six months old. Even then you're not guaranteed a clear result but you improve the odds. please see: http://www.offa.org/stats_hip.html For the record, on average, 11.9% of Labradors record HD in the OFA statistics . That's the percent that show up as bad hips in X-ray readings. Most of these will lead normal lives, though quite a few will get stiff in their hindquarters when they get old. At 11.9% affected, Labs rank #86 of 160 breeds reported, ranked from worst to best. Many familiar breeds have worse HD stats, including all the mastiffs and bulldogs, pug, SBT, AmStaff, Shih-Tzu, Beagle, GSD, Rotti, ACD, Golden Retriever, Akita, and (yes, PF) Poodle. The percent of Labbies with excellent hips was 17.9, placing them in the top quarter of all breeds scored (37th of 160 from best to worst; poodles rank 72nd). There were more Labradors scored than any other breed, and only breeds with 100+ scores were listed, so the statistics are unlikely to be a fluke of the numbers. I don't know why Labbies have such a bad reputation for HD. All the Lab breeders I know are careful about hip scores. I do know that the incidence of HD diagnosed by vets and disproved at a later time through X-rays and specialist diagnosis is pretty high. OCD is, statistically speaking, a worse problem with Labs than HD, but even with OCD, they are in the middle of the pack, and not, by any means, a problem breed. Of course, there is room for improvement. Puppy buyers should look for pedigrees with low incidence and talk with breeders about HD and OCD . . . you will find many breeders can give you scores going back a few generations, as well as scores for dam and sometime's sire's brothers and sisters. Also, listen to quality Lab breeders, like Zenchel, and ignore Poodlefan, who seems as intent on defaming Labradors as some people are in defaming pit bulls. Not walking on lead until six months is poor advice, as it will deprive the pup of many or most opportunities for socialisation. Of course, you need to do things in moderation . . . no different with a Lab than any other breed. Labs do have a propensity to eat too much . . . and moderation in feeding is especially important. I know one person who has ruined hips and elbows on a couple Lab pups by running them on lead beside a bicycle on pavement. . . sometimes going several miles. When I was breeding Labs I walked my pups on lead but off pavement from about four months, starting slowly. They were doing a few km by six months. The average hip score in my pack was below 4 (total of both sides) and old age arthritis hasn't been a problem. Muscles need to develop along with bones. Jarring is bad . . . stairs, jumping off the bed of a pickup truck, mad fetching, especially on pavement, etc. can do harm.

Hey guys . . . did anyone watch the UTube clip. This guy isn't hunting to kill. He raises the pigs as semi-wild and then does catch and release with his dogs. The dogs were brought up with piglets. One of his other Utube clips shows the piglets jumping up into the back of the pickup along with the dogs. The dogs are amazingly well trained. I'm sure there's an age old debate about pig/boar hunting with dogs. I find it interesting to realise it's not black and white. Some pig hunters are out for blood and gore. Others just want adrenalin and/or trophies. Others just want to get rid of the feral animals . . . and perhaps end up with some pork. I'd guess the range in their dogs is just as great.

Would it bother you if (a) the story wasn't true; and (b) the lady has a history of attacking and defaming decent breeders?

I only sort of explained. If he carries black he is black . . . because black is dominant (it always expresses itself). Chocolate is recessive and will only be expressed if there are two chocolate genes (bb). If your yellow pup's mum is chocolate (bb), you know she carried no black (B) gene. So your pup is some variety of yellow carrying chocolate. See http://www.blueknightlabs.com/color/coatcolor.html for a clear, simple presentation.

Update: Even Labs don't like the stuff. But if you mix it with a bit of sour cream . . . . yummmmmm! it goes right down.

UTube strikes again. This one shows a pack of 2 mo old mix breed pups playing with a wild-bred piglet of similar age. It's cute, but can't figure out whether the guy just loves animals or is teaching the dogs not to be afraid of pigs so he can use them in hunting. (I love the music) I can't figure out whether pig hunting is the last vestige of animal baiting or a legitimate way to rid the landscape of a highly destructive non-native species. Guess it's both. p.s. Going to the poster's website, looks like he does catch and release wild boar hunting . . . sounds like an EXTREME dog sport if ever there was one. . . .but not a blood sport . . . apart fom a good chance of dogs getting killed. Yes, there is purposed to raising the pups with the piglet. See: http://hogwrangler.com/index.htm You learn something every day!

To put the bottom line on top, stairs and puppies are not a good combination. I think that if the pup has good hips and elbows and only goes up and down calmly, stairs would be fine. But you can't know about the quality of their hips and elbows at a young age, and puppies aren't known for consistent calmness. I had a pup crash down three steps off the front verandah (she was playing with another pup) and come close to tearing her knee apart. I have heard others say that they've seen far worse.

This requires understanding of Laboratories, not Labradors. They make mistakes. I mated a choco girl carrying yellow (bb/Ee) to a black boy who had been genetically tested and found to carry both yellow and chocolate (Bb/Ee). 10 pups. Not one chocolate or the yellow you get when the chocolate gene is expressed (bb/ee). Chances are 1/1000 of this happening. So we send a sample from the dog to another lab. OOPS! They find the sire didn't carry chocolate (BB/Ee). A dog MUST carry the genes for the colour that it is unless something really strange has happened, eg., something has affected its pigment production system. At least that's how I understand it.

One of the interesting things about moving to the US is that I can now buy vaccinations and do my own dogs. It is SO cheap . . . and the shots are easy to give. If you buy in bulk, the equivalent of a C3 is a few dollars per dog. I'd think some change could be made in the laws to allow a trained shelter worker to do vaccinations under some sort of vet supervision. Selling sick dogs and managing epidemics must cost shelters far more than it would cost to outlay a few bucks per dog. Of course, this wouldn't get rid of parvo and there would be a few risks . . . but it would work in the right direction.

Puppy Sniffer outlines three approaches, in order of increasing effectiveness: Great post! So few of us understand the system from the inside. Thanks for posting.

Confused. The pictures in the article show Oscar well groomed and looking superficially healthy. The story says Trantor was arrested the day after he was rescued. The event must have happened more than a year ago, cause there were Oscar's Law rallies in October last year. If Deborah Trantor has been working for two decades, she has done so without getting much press. Google shows she has achieved almost no mainstream media coverage and I can find no indication that she has been arrested, other than one 2008 incident reported by the Herald Sun. No dog lover can support low-grade puppy farms, and only a tiny minority would support sale of puppies in pet shops. But I think we have to be skeptical of Animal Lib people. Top animal lib activist charged From: Herald Sun June 16, 2008 12:00AM A LEADING Victorian animal liberationist has been charged over an incident in which a man was injured when hit by a car and his dog breeder father suffered a heart attack. Debra Tranter has been charged with assault with a weapon, reckless conduct endangering life and reckless conduct causing injury after a clash at the ACA Breeders Kennels farm, near Sale. Matthew Hams suffered rib and back injuries when allegedly hit by a car at the farm. His father Colin, the farm's operator, had a minor heart attack during the drama. Ms Tranter will appear in Sale Magistrates' Court on June 24.

Flatcoats and goldens originated out of the same earlier retriever types. They didn't become distinct breeds until 1908. There are still some yellow flatcoats. For pictures and more authoritative text: see, eg http://retrieverman....ton-flat-coats/ http://retrieverman....ated-retriever/ http://retrieverman....er-arent-white/ Black was totally extricated from the golden bloodlines by breeding only from dogs with the recessive yellow genes. All goldies are e/e . . . like yellow Labs.

Fattening a dog has been a traditional method of dealing with energy levels for a long time Fatso.. and its not just Lab owners using it. Its the dog that pays though. I think PF should stop beating on Labs. She obviously doesn't like them, I doubt she has ever owned one, and she has cast all her chips on the 'environment' side of the 'environment' vs. 'genetics' debate. And like everyone else speaking on the subject of fat Labs, she shows pictures of young, lean working dogs who generally lack the deep chest and well sprung rib cage demanded by the breed standard. I'll bet she has never heard of Allen's Law (taught in animal physiology and ecology). Having owned a couple dozen Labs, I'd say it's more complicated than usually presented. I can keep Labs lean into their senior years. But they descend from dogs meant for cold water swimming, and the propensity to pack it on is, in my observation, always there.

Good to see someone taking concrete steps. You might want to re-post this in the In the News forum under the 'what can we do' thread. I started a collection of web links showing pit bull X's who would 'pass' under the standard and posted as http://www.dolforums.com.au/topic/226097-pit-bull-xs-that-could-pass-and/ . Some of the posts in that thread, and my collection of links, may be useful (I realise that you specifically state that you do not want to include APBT descended dogs). Many of the links are to rescue dogs or family pets, and I'd guess the owners or organisations involved would have no problem with someone reproducing photos and information to fight a pernicious and stupid BS law. I was thinking of doing two collages . . .one of dogs who have NO pit bull blood but are endangered by the 'standard'. The other of dogs who have pit bull lines and would not be declared pit bull by the 'standard'.

Cosmolo, have you been able to find out any information regarding the standard and crossbreed dogs. Does the dog need to fit every point on the standard to be deemed as restricted? Or is there a certain percentage that the dog has to fit before it is accused of being restricted? I don't know if I have been looking in the wrong place, but I can't find anything. I also wonder about the Vet Cert part of the legislation. Is a vet able to state that a dog is a breed other than Amstaff. It is written so poorly, and vaguely, this doesn't seem clear to me. Can the vet certify that he honesty believes a dog to be a cross of certain breeds? If they are saying a council worker is able to make this decision, surely a vet is able to as well! Has anyone found any information about this. I have emailed asking the Minister and another MP, but still no reply......a week later, and time is ticking by.... So many of us with adopted dogs and cross breeds need the answers to these questions? According to the bill's sponsor, P.R. Hall (see http://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/members/id/99 ): Section 20 of the charter act provides that a person must not be deprived of his or her property other than in accordance with law. A deprivation of property is permitted if the powers which authorise the deprivation are conferred by legislation or common law, are confined and structured rather than arbitrary or unclear, and are accessible to the public and formulated precisely. The large number of unanswered questions potentially invalidates the Law is under the Victorian Charter of Human Rights. It may be worth filing a complaint to the Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission . . . or at least giving them a call. It would be worth writing to Peter Hall, who sponsored the bill. Also to Mr Barber from Northern Metropolitan (http://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/members/id/1680 ), who questioned would receive adequate public discussion or achieve adequate clarity in the discussion in the Daily Hansard, 30 August 2011. A phone call to Barber might be worth the time. He may be sympathetic, and in a position to a) direct you to advice; and b) use information about your situation to bring pressure to bare on the powers that be to clarify . . .or admit that clarity is not possible. Mr Hall has justified the standard cause one vet, one all breeds judge, and one council officer were involved in its formulation. He fails to mention that the Australian Veterinary Association came out strongly against the breed specific parts of the legislation, in part because it is not possible to unambiguously identify breed.

Perhaps, you might read instead of going off half-cocked. He was Refering to one of the cases in the article Tyra who was killed by four dogs in NSW in 2007. Hearing hoofbeats, thinking zebra? If he meant the NSW 2007 case, he should have mentioned that case. The recent Victoria case is what is on everyone's minds, and unless otherwise specified, is the point of reference, 'One of the cases in the article' . . . come on. Which article? There are two articles mentioned in this thread, one relating to the spotted tailed quoll and Peter Walsh, the other opens with reference to four year old Ayen Chol.

Spinosad based insecticides may help keep ticks out of your yard. Try a google search. They were recommended to me for use in the vineyard to kill a certain moth pest. I notice that the stuff is supposed to be effective against ticks, and is safe with mammals, in general (organic growers can use it on grapes).

Snake Catcher . . .good posts, thanks! Can you suggest any dog training programs that focus on creating snake aversion (or organise one)? I once tried to set up snake training sessions in WA using electronic collars and live reptiles. I couldn't find any snake people willing to let their snakes be used, even in enclosures that guaranteed the snake was safe. I am not convinced that training on blue tongue lizards protects against snakes, at least not 100% of the time, cause dogs can tell one person from another, so telling one species (or genus or family) of reptile from another should be trivial for them. Would be better to do aversion training with snakes . . . even better, with the snake species of concern in the local area.

black is dominant. Somatic mutations, as in Adrian2's link, could produce black from two yellow/gold/red dogs, and there may be some roundabout ways it could happen . . . but all in all, not bloody likely.

They could just as easily conclude that people with poorer mental and physical health, or those who suffer from pain, seek out the company of pets to provide social support, as suggested by the experimental data in McConnell et al. (2011). I agree. Correlation does not prove causation and often confuses effect and cause...or finds correlations between two effect of another, unnoticed, cause. I found the article while trying (with no success) to locate a study I remember hearing of that showed that 'elders' with pets lived longer than those without pets. Science brainwashing says you MUST not throw out evidence that goes against your biases. Us dog lovers are inclined to look for evidence that shows our dogs are good for us. But we shouldn't discard other evidence.

The human rights (as opposed to animal rights) side of this is probably better set forward in the testimony in the Vic Hansard testimony just before the Law was voted on http://www.parliamen...August_2011.pdf specifically p. 63, where the Hon (??) minister is trying to justify the legality of the provision, quote: This amendment engages the right to property in section 20 and the protection against retrospective criminal laws in section 27(1) of the charter act. Right to property (section 20) Section 20 of the charter act provides that a person must not be deprived of his or her property other than in accordance with law. A deprivation of property is permitted if the powers which authorise the deprivation are conferred by legislation or common law, are confined and structured rather than arbitrary or unclear, and are accessible to the public and formulated precisely. I'm not a lawyer and my reading skills are challenged by reading law. But I'd say you need to find and understand the Section 20 right to property and the rules against retrospective criminal laws to mount any sort of defense.