sandgrubber

If dogs managed to be sustained as human companions through a few (or even several) glaciations, they'll be with us through a major warming event. Human's garbage is often food to a dog. Urbanisation IS a big problem for dog ownership . . . but can be dealt with through change in the mix of dog sizes and a system that caters to and demands responsible dog ownership, especially for dogs living in high-density areas. Northern Europe handles it well. Dogs are more loved than children in many places, and dog owners take their responsibilities seriously.

I can one worse this. Many years ago someone hit my dog. . . a 1 yr old I had JUST adopted from an animal shelter . . . she ran across the road when I opened the car door. I called her and she came, but these drongos came speeding around the corner and hit her. They did stop. They chewed me out and threatened to sue me cause their precious car got a small dent in its fender. Poor Sprocket got a badly broken hip that had to be pinned, and she couldn't walk for many weeks. Won't mention the vet bill. Some people!

Thanks for the links . . .guess the bottom line for Labs is 'not awful, but with plenty of room for improvement'. Should note that 10.8 and 11.9% affected includes Class I, which are often radiometric dysplasia, but not clinical . . . or if clinical, show up as old age arthritis. The numbers look much better if you look only at Class 2 and Class 3. The real numbers are probably worse than the OFA numbers (for all breeds) cause people with bad X-rays often avoid going on to get scored and marginal breeders may avoid scoring altogether. Btw, if you look at the sum of Grade II and Grade III OCD, (I'd say III is at least twice as bad as II, so did a sum of percent affected in II + III *2) you get the following breeds get scores greater than 5. The bolded breeds are over 10. Bolded and underlined, over 15. Pug and chow chow are over 40!!!! PUG CHOW CHOW CHINESE SHAR-PEI ROTTWEILER BERNESE MOUNTAIN DOG NEWFOUNDLAND BLACK RUSSIAN TERRIER AMERICAN BULLDOG DOGUE DE BORDEAUX FILA BRASILEIRO GERMAN SHEPHERD DOG MASTIFF ENGLISH SETTER BULLMASTIFF IRISH WATER SPANIEL ST. BERNARD AMERICAN PIT BULL TERRIER BLOODHOUND CANE CORSO TIBETAN MASTIFF STAFFORDSHIRE BULL TERRIER SHILOH SHEPHERD GORDON SETTER

I'd love to see a working dog competition that involved bringing in fishing nets in the Bay of Fundy :D. With Labs, I think you can have it both ways. The English working Lab's unofficial role, during the formative years of the breed, was gentleman's companion in a repressive society in which many upper class people were deprived of touch (ie, they were therapy dogs, even though saying so would be unthinkable). I would guess that much early selection in the breed was done for dogs who were responsive and easy to live with. There were people who kenneled their dogs and took hunting very seriously . . . but I've also read accounts, which quite surprised me, of muddy dog prints in the bed after hunting expeditions. You can find dogs with 'on' 'off' temperament, who are high drive when working, but relaxed when not doing so. And you find many breeders aiming for 'dual purpose' Labs, with titles in both retrieving and conformation. I think all the many roles of the Lab are wonderful . . .well, maybe not bomb detection cause it so often kills them. If I were still in Australia and were self-confident as a breeder, I'd aim for multi-purpose dogs with calm temperaments . . . and back off the traditional coat, which is too heavy for the Australian climate, challenges vacuum cleaners in the home, and is more appropriate to the role Labs no longer fill . . . bringing in fishing nets. (I'm in a cool temperature part of the US and coat does not interfere with working here). It may be heresy, but I think conformation should be allowed to change when the dog's function changes. By the way, when people say 'form follows function' . .. I wonder what guidance that gives those with lap dogs ;).

Ah yes, but there's the rule and then there's the question of whether or not anyone is motivated to enforce it. I spent two years going to classes and doing lab work at Univ. of Calif Santa Barbara and brought a Lab with me every day. Sometimes she hung out when I went into buildings. I was younger then, wouldn't do it now. Dogs weren't allowed on campus, but there were lots of dog lovers around and there were many more important rules to enforce. As one of the examiners on my PhD committee told me (about a different matter): "It's easier to get forgiveness than permission."

Hard to get lower. Ok, there are a few mass murderers who have set the bar for low. But this is SICK!!!

Good to hear I'm not alone . . . yes, I say excuse me (or 'scoozie') and 'sorry' as well. How can you accidentally step on a dog and not apologize. Not a well formed idea, but I sort of think there's a group of people who say 'thank you' to their dogs and end out with polite, if not always obedient, best friends. 'Leadership' can gentle, and a pack doesn't have to be based on dominance, threat, and dominance. I admire Ceasar Milan, etc., but I don't think domineering is the only way to have a good relationship with a dog, and I think they understand and appreciate common courtesy . . . if in a doggy sort of way.

Please run a logic checker. You've got a double negative above [nothing . . . made not one iota] that blunts, if not turns around your argument. But responding to what I think you meant, as opposed to what you said . . . How do you know? Positions, especially positions with a poor factual basis (or that defy the laws of physics), are often undermined by long sustained pressure. Immediate responses are often superficial. Think of the many people who, as youths, thought one way, and as mature adults, have changed their attitudes. KEEP UP THE PRESSURE!!!!! Maybe I'm a hopeless idealist, but I still believe in force of reason. Btw, what was the quality of the things people said? In particular, how strong was the element of denial? When you have a debate with two sides parading half truths, improvement is possible when both sides increase their quotient of truth. May be gradual. WTF. It's taken a long time for things to degenerate. It'll take a long time for them to improve. If I may be so vain as to use my response (posted on PDE blog) as an example . . . I think things like this need to be said, over and over and over again. No doubt others can say it better than I. I do believe the unbalanced stance of PDE can be turned. . . and the grotesque aspects of show-directed breeding can be reversed to put function before cosmetic form. I think moderation and balance are as important in argument as in dog breeding. Here's my entry to the PDE blog . . . which includes many, many interesting entries: Please put finger on the problem. The problem is showing as a basis for selection . . . NOT PEDIGREE DOGS. The pedigree provides a solid basis for selecting for health, temperament, and working ability. Problem is, it has been misused to select for extreme conformation, particularly in some breeds. I sympathize with much of PDE stuff. I just wish it didn't have the effect of turning dog lovers away from the good things in the pedigree world, making life harder for breeders who put health and temperament first, and encouraging the scum who produce DD cross breeds from dogs with no traceable health records and no tested temperament as a way to make money. JH has owned danes, Labbies, and now owns a flat coat. Wouldn't surprise me if she has experienced the sorrow of a sweet and beautiful, but unsound, dog (so common with danes). I'd guess she's as vulnerable to the marvels of a good working dog as I am,

I emailed JH, in part to tell her about an awful link on her personal page (which she says was hacked), emphasizing that there were still healthy working dogs and that the problem wasn't PEDIGREE, it was breeding for show conformation. Her response: "I am particularly keen to highlight what can be learned from the working sides of the breeds - and probably haven't done enough of that recently." It would be great to have a PDE III that focussed on good breeding. . . and I think that could happen. I agree with others that PDE is doing damage to the pedigee dog world. I think the emphasis on PEDIGREE is wrong, AND logically inconsistent with the goal of breeding healthy dogs. The pedigree system is the best basis for rescue of breeds that are in trouble, as the good features of the breeds we love have been concentrated through good pedigree breeding. . . . as for Labradors The breed standard for Labradors says 'powerful' (I think it's the secon word in the breed standard) and you are right, conformation judging is pushing the breed to exaggerate big bones and broad heads. Unfortunately, the part of the breed standard that stresses endurance and hard work is poorly tested in the ring. We in the Labrador community need to reverse that trend. We have to stop referring to the leggier working type Lab as being 'ugly' and appreciate the inherent soundness of a medium build. On the other hand, Labs should be powerful and athletic, and, being bred originally to bring in fishing nets off the coast of Newfoundland, they should be solid and able to carry a little blubber. Solid bone is good, and I think the breeders of 1950 would have preferred strong boned over lanky. Physiology permitsbalanced, stocky animals to be sound if the balance of muscle to bone is right and the architecture of bone is efficient. I'd hate to see people breeding Labs to look like greyhounds. But I would love to see Australians allow the local interpretation of the breed standard move toward a dog with a lighter coat and leaner frame, capable of sustaining work at high temperature. As for melting big brown eyes, I don't see the harm in giving a few points for experssion . I think you are incorrect on the health question. Labradors have a reputation for HD and all quality breeders pay attention to both HD and OCD. The reputation for HD is not justified by the statistics: Australian Labrador HD average score (sum of both sides), at 12, is the same as SBT and below the KC Cavalier, Goldies, GSD's, and Airdales, to name a few. Of course, there is room for improvement . . . but Lab breeders take hip scores seriously and there should be further gradual improvement over time. I have never found statistics comparing breed average elbow scores, and would appreciate pointers to them, but given the emphasis that even show people put on looking for 0,0 elbows, I would guess OCD is fairly low and declining. Of course, there are Labrador breeders who compromise the breed by breeding their lines close and putting conformation above health and temperament.. . and these are concentrated in the show ring (and unfortunately, are rewarded by many judges). Look at the Labs selected for Guide Dogs or at sniffer dogs used by the police, or as hunting dogs (US, Scandanavia and UK are better than Oz on this score because there is much more bird hunting going on), or by the military as bomb detection dogs. You will see a much healthier looking dog. You will also find many show Labs are dual purpose, and compete in both retrieving and conformation. I'm not a showie, but I suspect that for Labbies, the worst judging comes from the 'all breeds' judges, and the breed specialists, at least with Labs, tend to emphasize 'balance' over 'power'. What needs to happen with Labs, and with every breed, is for those who breed for moderate/balanced conformation and emphasise health and temperament in breeding programs to take a firm stand against the pressure, coming from the show ring, to exaggerate the hallmark conformational features of the breed, and to focus on breeding for health and the temperament expected in the working ancestral stock (for Labradors, biddable, intelligent, trainable, non-aggressive, stable). Strangely, working within breed clubs Jemima Harrison prescribes . . .though she makes a lot of comments I find irritating. See: http://pedigreedogse...d.blogspot.com/

Dogs sense temperature (as, eg., do ticks, many snakes . . . and many many other animals). That brings the count to six. But the impression of sixth sense owes more to extremely keen smell and hearing, and relatively poor sight . . . and a brain that assembles information differently than human brains do.

Here's the original source for this thread . . . extract follows. http://pedigreedogsexposed.blogspot.com/2011/06/pde-two.html PDE Two A few days ago, I let the Kennel Club and others know that the BBC has commissioned me to make a follow-up film to Pedigree Dogs Exposed, to explore what impact the film had and to assess what progress has been made in addressing conformation and genetic issues in purebred dogs since 2008. PDE 2 will be what the BBC call a "personal view" film - acknowledging, as of course I have to, how involved I have become in this issue since making Pedigree Dogs Exposed. There has been no response from the Kennel Club yet. I am keen for the KC to have a voice in the film so hope they will decide to take part and to let me film at one or two dog shows between now and the end of the year so we can see what progress has been made since PDE, particularly as regards the "high-profile" breeds. I asked, in fact, to film at Southern Counties Champ Show this weekend - and was turned down by Show Chairman David Cavill, although he has kindly offered himself as an independent expert on the film. I went along anyway yesterday and, walking along the benches mid-afternoon saw a man coming towards me who looked very familiar. We recognised each other at the same instant. It was Ronnie Irving, outgoing Chair of the KC, who did a bit of a double-take and hurried on. A few minutes later, an announcement went over the Tannoy reminding everyone that filming was not allowed. Coincidence? It was the only such announcement I heard all day. I am, in fact, bound by strict broadcasting rules. There's nothing to stop me going in as a paying punter and using the lenses that God gave me, but, having been refused access to film, there's no way I can sneak in with a camera.

PETA = PITA (too American? Make that PITB, for Pain In The Bum). How about ganging up on the Pedigree Dogs Exposed blog and pointing out that the bad apples haven't spoiled the bin: That many breeders breed for health, working ability, and temperament; and that many breeders of non-pedigree dogs breed for the almighty dollar (or pound . . . pun intended); that if you want predictable dog, purebred is better; that pedigrees mean something. I do not think this is a case of all hanging together or we'll all hang separately. I think the public has general sympathies for pedigree dogs, but are made uneasy by extremes of 'conformation' as sometimes sought in the show ring. I think it's important to put pressure on breeders who put 'winning' above all and in the process take cruel shortcuts to beauty, or relax standards for health and/or temperament. I don't want to be allied with people who breed for conformation extremes, or with people who wax their dogs. I think that hanging them out to dry would improve the pedigree dog world AND reduce the criticism. Shaar, I believe you don't shave or wax. But do you know people who do? Do you belong to a breed club? How about working with the breed circle to gain acceptance for the fully haired Crestie as well as the hairless, and to bring shame on those who go to extremes to remove hair. Personally, I think that would be more productive than railing against PDE. p.s., I know nothing about Cresties . . . other than having been involved, once, in a search for a valuable stud dog who had escaped from a breeder's kennels, and was especially hard to catch because it ran from everyone, especially the breeder.

Apologies. I'm embarrassed about loosing my temper, but I do so sometimes. I was paid to be picky about grammar, spelling and usage for many years and I never liked the role. It p's me off to be criticised, or should I say criticized, for using one Americanism. Guess there's a bit of a bull breed about me . It's hard to ignore a perceived attack. Thanks to those who have brought the thread back on topic. I'll try to do a summary someday . . . giving people a set of links to blogs worth trying. [interjections in square brackets]. btw., Mervin, that should have read 'Sandgrubber asked [tense wrong] a question about 'their' and 'there'; [full stop or semi colon, not comma. Use either quotes or italics to set their and there apart from the rest of the text. Btw, I did not ask a question. The difference between the two words is clear, and the same in US and UK English]. I answered it. Get your hackles down. [Heckles, in US or British English, relates to abuse of a public speaker . . . most often seen as heckling. Hackles, or perhaps haeckles in older versions of English, refers to the hair on a dog, or other animal's neck]. I just get annoyed that every time I spell it right in the Queen's English [English is a proper noun and should be capitalised . . . or capitalized . . . and you missed the apostrophe in Queen's], an American spell checker tells me I am wrong. End result is [tense?] that in years to come everyone will spell it in the American way. I am not having a go at the American people.' [No? Then are you attacking me, personally?] PLEASE learn the Queen's English, find a British spell checker, and stop attacking people [by which I mean, me] over trivial spelling differences that have nothing to do with dogs. Guess I'm still mad. Sandgrubber ask a question about there and their, I answered it. Get your heckles down, I just get annoyed that every time I spell it right in the Queens english an american spell check tells me I am wrong, end result is that in years to come every one will spell it the american way, I am not having a go at american people. Edited to correct minor punctuation errors.

Yes that's another rock that needs to be turned over. I'm sure if someone with the right skills set into it, a show focusing on DD's and puppy mills could balance the exposure of pedigree dogs. (Not sure about X-breeds. In my experience X-breeds are all over the map. I've never met a Lab X kelpie that I didn't like, or, for that matter, one with HD. Commercial X-breeding feeding pet shops is another story.) But the problems with pedigree dogs bred and managed to win shows require exposure. And some in the show community have a snobbish sort of nastyness that invites wrath. My mum (b. 1923) was raised in Minnesota with working style cocker spaniels. She regarded the AKC American Cocker Spaniel as an abomination.. . ruined temperament and all too pretty/fussy. Also, the collie, that was, even by the 1950s, narrow skulled and no longer bright, like Lassie. I was raised to believe that show breeding was ruining various breeds. My observations tend to justify the prejudice I was raised with, and extend it. Bassets are lovely dogs. But it's so sad that they've gotten so bulky that many can't mate naturally . . . and back problems are very common; or that entropian is the norm with shar peis. Sick that people are soooo keen on winning shows that they would take a partially haired crestie and wax it. And it makes me want to cry that so many of the gentle giants live short and painful lives. I think a lot of dog lovers carry around observations/ prejudices like the ones I was brought up with . . . hence the 'Pedigree dogs exposed' has a big audience.

I get about 18 inches of a queensize bed. I don't know why the damn dogs insist on lying crosswise rather than longwise and putting their bums to my face.

It's hard to separate prejudice from 'expectations'. Here are some residual thoughts form running a boarding kennel for several years: I have positive prejudices toward all gun dogs and feel hurt when they don't justify my expectations (friendly, willing to please). I expect them (espec. Labbies and Goldies) to be awful diggers, and if not well trained, to jump up on people. GSP's are often hard to get in at night and can be noisy. I am cautious of guarding breeds when they may have something to guard, and some are hard on other dogs. I am cautious of terriers, bull breeds, and a few other types when it comes to interacting with other dogs . . . years of working in a boarding kennel tells me that some are fine and some aren't. Herding breeds are often great (apart from compulsive fetching) but tend to fence fight and may get bossy in ways that start non-lethal fights. I pretty much lost my prejudice against SWF's (little yappers) in the boarding kennel . . . most of them are great. Kelpies and staffies are the worst, when it comes to escaping. Kelpies go over. Staffies crowd doors. And of course, any 40 kg + is a problem if the dog isn't well behaved. Staffies are often lovable clowns. Staffy X = unpredictable. Greyhounds are sweeties, but not real bright. Afghans are like greyhounds, with a coat from hell.

We have this kind of dialogue in my house, regularly. MOVE!!!! . . . dog moves, reluctantly. Thank you! good girl! Scratch scratch / pat pat. I feel a little silly saying thank you to the dogs, but I can't help myself. And I think they've come to regard it as a reward, particularly for obeying commands they don't specially want to obey. Also seems good, if kids happen to be watching, to reinforce ideas of politeness. I avoid 'Please' . . . dogs understand commands but I think requests are confusing. How do others use polite words with dogs? Or am I just a little crazy?

sorry, I don't get this. I was raised in the US and spent many years in Australia. I have trouble with spelling differences between English dialects. If you use a dozen question marks, please provide an intelligible question. The point of the post was to help people direct one another to useful/interesting/fun blogs. Given the number of times I've overlooked what are blatant errors in spelling/usage in any English dialect, eg., 'there' for 'their' and 'its' for 'it's' on posts, I am inclined to take it personally when someone attacks for what is correct spelling of 'favorite' in US English . . . but I refrain from pointing my middle finger :D.

Maybe should pm but nothing to keep private. When I moved to WA, I was confused about whether WA-ers were sandgropers or sandgurbbers. They sound the same if you're from the USA, as I am. When I went to apply for a prefix, sandgroper was taken (no surprise), but sandgrubber was wide open. I see 'sandgrubber' as both descriptive of Perth area geography and a tribute to my ability to confuse words. I'm now in coastal California and TAS Fog's Edge, but for Australian purposes I'll remain sandgrubber. Believe me, if you've been exposed to Perth's economy, a lot of us are grubbing (-:

Does not belong on DOL. Full stop.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/10/1021_021021_dogswithjobs2.html Brooklyn Dog a Rising Star in New York Art Scene Sharon Guynup for National Geographic Channel October 21, 2002 Most of America's 68 million dogs are pampered pets, but a small percent still actually work for their biscuits. Among these gainfully employed canines, there's a range of occupations, from seeing-eye and guard dogs to sheep herders and hunting dogs. But artists? Tillie, a three-year-old Jack Russell terrier from Brooklyn is, according to her Web site, "the world's preeminent canine artist." She is indeed a rising star among visual artists on the New York City contemporary art scene. The 16-pound female, whose full name is Tillamook Cheddar (for the Oregon cheese she's so fond of), has seen her pictures hung in 12 exhibitions over the past three years, including six one-dog shows. She's made a dozen TV appearances—and the four-legged artist has sold about 100 pictures, with sales "in the five-figures." Tillie's abstract creations have been likened to modern masters Willem de Kooning and Cy Twombly. In her most recent show at the prestigious National Arts Club—entitled "Collarobations"—she created works with the controversial artist Tom Sachs, photographer Dirk Westphal, and 24 other humans. How Does a Dog Embark on an Art Career? Okay, so how exactly does a dog embark on an art career? It all began when Tillie was just a six-month-old pup. One day, her owner, freelance writer Bowman Hastie, was sitting on the couch writing on a legal pad. The dog jumped up and started scratching away at the pad. . . . and it goes on

I'm amazed by the quality of some of the K9 blogs out therre. Title says it all. Do you have a favorite dog blog? If so, please post,

Good pick! I think DOL needs to set up a pinned topic for good (or relevant . . . sometimes it's good to keep track of the anti-pedigree dog community) blogs.

I've tried the repellers . . . in a caravan, where they should have maximum effect. No effect on mice, whatsoever. Went back to traps. It's easy to put them in places where dogs won't put paws, like the back of a cupboard or next to the toaster.

Link to full article Interesting, start, but needs much more work to be convincing. I would have liked to see more description of Fox's studies of wolf behaviour, eg., description of where it was done under what circumstances. His work is ~ 40 years old . . . are his methods still considered valid? Do the wolves he studied reflect wolves as a whole? And more importantly, do they represent wolves as they existed before extensive environmental modification by Homo sapiens. I don't think you can characterize all French Bulldogs by observing four females interact in five one hour sessions. I find the group behaviour of Labradors varies considerably between breeders . . . don't know if this is due to genetics or environment. It's peculiar that he doesn't mention Balyaev's work with foxes which so strongly showed correlation between morphological and behavioural changes during domestication.