sandgrubber

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.

I agree, modern life in the 'burbs requires more restraint. Nostalgia and sorrow that it's so. It's a vicious cycle and dog attacks are part and parcel of the decline. People don't select dogs for social temperament. Owners rarely pts their own dogs when they show HA/DA problems or bother livestock. Some laugh it off or even encourage it. Dogs and kids don't get to play in the street. Dogs get fenced in the back yard and ignored. They howl, get destructive, some get mean. When they do 'get out', they don't know what to do, and some do bad things. Others merely get run over. You can still find pockets in the US where, regardless of the law, dogs live more-or-less free, but it's getting harder to find such places. My brother lives in one. His two rat terriers have their territories, which don't coincide with his property boundary, and the old girl feigns attack when an unfamiliar dog comes on property . . . but she doesn't do anything. Both dogs go with him when he goes running . . . he'll do miles in the nearby woods . . . he doesn't even bother to carry a leash. The neighbors dogs visit. No big deal. If they bothered my SIL's horses or otherwise caused problems, there would be words . . . In much of Europe, almost all yards have fences, and dogs are kept in yards, so QED, they are fenced in. But some do go visiting, and are allowed to do so. Archie the Labrador, in that memorable BBC story (dog takes train home without owner . . . duly noted by the railroad officials who called the owner rather than nabbing the dog for riding without a ticket) wasn't wandering. He was heading home, presumably cause he got bored waiting for his owner. I've lived more in Germany (outside Leipzig) and Austria (outside Vienna) than the UK. There, dogs are generally more welcome than kids, and it's not uncommon to find an dog off leash in a restaurant/pub setting. I walked my Lab cross daily in open space, all around the 'dorf' . . . no leash needed . . and people were totally accepting. Sure, a big Rotti guard dog will be kept on leash if it's walked outside the compound. Also spent some time in less-developed countries, where guard dogs are kept by the rich -- and are often tied or fenced -- but the street mongrels (which are coming to be recognised as land races) are left to forage where they can. Leash laws are a necessary evil. But they are still evil. I hope there will always be some pockets where the ACO is either subtle, or too overworked to apply the law, and where people can keep the peace on their own.

I must have marked >10,000 papers in my career as a University lecturer (I'm retired now). If I used the standard you propose, half the papers I marked would have been considered plagiarism. If the Vic stardard were a university paper, I would have given a warning that sources need to be acknowledged, and the text is running close to the source. I might even have said that non-acknowledgement can be considered plagiarism. But the University officialdom would not have been pleased if a formal charge of plagiarism were brought . . . trying to enforce such a standard would have swamped the system. You may get further in trying to trace the diagrams, which may be taken from a copyrighted source and may infringe on copyright law. (By the pathetically low standards demanded by some Australian Universities, this would have gotten 65 to 75% as a paper . . . it borrowed from at least three sources and bothered to cut some figures into the text in a way that showed some understanding of the concepts under discussion. Grammar and punctuation are generally ok.) The authors of the legislation were in a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. If they improvised too much and showed original thought, as we encourage students to do, they would have gotten blasted for making things up.

I doubt you'll get anywhere with this line. Looking at the two documents (Vic Breed Standard and UKC Standard), I'd say one was modeled after the other, but not copied from it. The 'climbing ability' part comes from the US version, but isn't copied word for word. The head description borrows more from the US version, but again, changes some words. Vic Standard The American Pit Bull Terrier is a medium sized dog and is strongly built with well defined muscles. The breed is noted for its climbing ability and subsequent strength in its hindquarters. The overall outline of the breed indicates it to be slightly longer in length (point of shoulder to buttocks) than height (withers to ground). Bitches may be slightly longer than males. A distance from withers to the elbow and the elbow to the ground is generally equal. The head is proportionate to the dog. Viewed from above, the general shape of the head is that of a blunt wedge, large and broad. Viewed from the side, the skull and muzzle are on parallel plains separated by a moderately deep stop. Arches over the eyes are well defined but not pronounced (refer figure 3). Here's the first para of the UK Standard The American Pit Bull Terrier is a medium-sized, solidly built, short-coated dog with smooth, well-defined musculature. This breed is both powerful and athletic. The body is just slightly longer than tall, but bitches may be somewhat longer in body than dogs. The length of the front leg (measured from point of elbow to the ground) is approximately equal to one-half of the dog’s height at the withers. The head is of medium length, with a broad, flat skull, and a wide, deep muzzle. Ears are small to medium in size, high set, and may be natural or cropped. The relatively short tail is set low, thick at the base and tapers to a point. The American Pit Bull Terrier comes in all colors and color patterns except merle. This breed combines strength and athleticism with grace and agility and should never appear bulky or muscle-bound or fine-boned and rangy. Above all else, the APBT must have the functional capability to be a catch dog that can hold, wrestle (push and pull) and breathe easily while doing its job. Balance and harmony of all parts are critical components of breed type. and the US Standard The American Pit Bull Terrier is a medium-sized, solidly built, short-coated dog with smooth, well-defined musculature. This breed is both powerful and athletic. The body is just slightly longer than tall, but bitches may be somewhat longer in body than dogs. The length of the front leg (measured from point of elbow to the ground) is approximately equal to one-half of the dog's height at the withers. The head is of medium length, with a broad, flat skull, and a wide, deep muzzle. Ears are small to medium in size, high set, and may be natural or cropped. The relatively short tail is set low, thick at the base and tapers to a point. The American Pit Bull Terrier comes in all colors and color patterns. This breed combines strength and athleticism with grace and agility and should never appear bulky or muscle-bound or fine-boned and rangy.

Cosmolo - under the Q&A for the DPI site, given that your dogs are registered already, if someone dobs them in as a pitbull type and the authorised person agrees, then, when your rego expires, it will be up to the council whether or not you have to register as a restricted breed. Mum to Emma - the restrictions on pit bull types are a lot more than just muzzled when walked. And yes - lots of greyhound people are against this and have lobied for dogs that pass an assessment to be allowed to go outside without a muzzle (in Vic GAP greyhounds never need to be muzzled). The information posted on DPI doesn't specify what the dogs need to have been registered as. Being already registered with the Council as non-dangerous dogs may not be sufficient. A vigalante ACO may read the regs to mean they need to have been previously registered as a Dangerous Dog for prior registration to count. The Law is badly written, and needs to be challenged.

READ! Ayen Chol was watching TV in her own home. The dog that killed her wandered in. It amazes me that ALL pit bull looking dogs are condemned, yet we have yet to see a photo of the dog in question. It may well have been a pig dog of some sort that would have passed the Vic breed 'standard'. And the owner may yet get off scott free.