sandgrubber

I notice that this item isn't getting much comment. If the breed had been specified, I'd expect it would get many pages. We reward journos for naming the breed.

I hope the atheists are moral athiests and are willing to give a hand to the poor fools who have zero'ed out their assets in expectation of a rapture that didn't happen. Or at least offer a had to their pets. There are going to be a few families out there who have lost everything, including hope/faith, and are going to have to carry on, and may have both a great need for the unconditional love that dogs give, and a lack or resources to pay for dog food and pet care. Atheists range from nihilists to people that say that all that matters is morality . . . so one needs to look behind the label.

Living in an area of the US where BYB random bred pit bulls are very common, I'd agree with statements about the variety of bullies here, but not the 'breed is a mess'. I think diversity is good for a breed. The random bred dogs live with families, and if they're bad tempered, it's likely that the puppies will be hard to place. If they're unhealthy, it's unlikely that they'll reproduce. We have HIGHLY subsidized spey/neuter ($40) and licenses are required to keep an entire dog or bitch. So breeding isn't entirely random. I'd say the breed is disorderly in the US, but I'd say that's good. I haven't read all the thread, so I may have lost something, but I find it hard to define the 'work' of the pit bull. If it's fighting or defense, I think there's reason to restrict the breed . . . but the street pit bull who was, quite loosely, bred to be a family member, is more or less like other mutts, and I see no reason for restrictions. I also think everyone . . . not this poster .. . needs to be more specific about children. A three year old and a 10 year old are quite different in their ability to relate to dogs . . . and some 10 year olds are a lot better than others.

Bitey face???? That game is called mouthy-mouth. I've watched my Labs play it for years. Sometimes they're so loud they drown out the radio or TV. I've tried with no success to figure out the rules. Great vids, thanks for posting.

If you've already got a one child policy, one dog sounds mild.

I'm reminded of a sad story a local vet told me. Mum brings the family Lab in to be PTS because it bit one of the kids. After the green dream was administered they discovered that the poor dog had a couple of sewing needles literally put through her ears. Mum says OMG, should have done the kids rather than the dog. It isn't breed specific . . . but has some breed tendencies. Some dogs will happily take a lot of what the kids think is funny and are natural tolerant guardians, like Wendy in Peter Pan. I don't think minute by minute supervision is always needed with such dogs, except with little babies. I remember when I was about nine and suffered some little tragedy, going out to the fort us kids out behind the house with the dog and crying my eyes out. The dog was wonderfully sympathetic, much better than a person. I don't like to see 'supervision' make it so that kids can't build this sort of bond with dogs. But kids need to develop respect for animals, and parents need to develop guidelines and keep their feelers out for problems that may be developing. Putting an inadequately socialized dog together with inadequately socialized kids is a disaster waiting to happen. And it happens all the time.

+1 . . . but I'm not cosmetically inclined and don't give a hoot if there's dog hair on my clothes.

You might put up a sign on the notice board at the CAWA. No guarantees, but it's cheap and might turn something up.

I'm 62. I have a tiny scar under one of my eyes from an unsupervised encounter with an Irish Setter when I was four years old. My father was a doctor doing a house call. I got brought along. I ended out with the dog while everyone else was attending a sick family member. I was probably being an ass and pulling on the pretty long red hairs and the dog was jumpy (not 'solid nerve'). I got bitten and needed a few stitches. BFD. I wish people could put such incidents in the 'shit happens' category. On the other hand, a dog killing a kid is MUCH MUCH MUCH more serious. I worry that the 'solid nerve' types may exceed some tolerance level and solid nerve becomes 'solid attack'. Does it work this way? Are some dogs (breed a good but imperfect prediction) jumpy and prone to nipping, but unlikely to be lethal, while some other dogs may be stable . . . but pushed too far, lethal?

And what happens to the dogs given Titanium teeth as this dog was which can bite through body armour, or when hit by shells etc. Perhaps we could use suicide dogs to blow up tanks as Russia did in WW2 or train dolphins to kill scuba divers or have RAAF dogs which are killed if their owner breaks a leg as they're too dangerous for anyone else to handle. No, it may look fascinating but in the end it's war and deadly serious. Keep it to ourselves. The titanium teeth thing is a myth that plays on the sci-fi / comic book bionic fantasies. Military dogs are given titanium teeth when they break a tooth . . . not otherwise. I have four titanium teeth myself. Implants are expensive, and the fact that the military is willing to pay for them says something about the level of veterinary care. I doubt that replacing natural teeth with metal on titanium roots would make a dog any better at attack functions. Read the discussion in the Dogs of War article in the Foreign Affairs blog . . . It was horrid that dogs were left behind in Vietnam, and I think the Australian government still leaves dogs behind due to quarantine issues . . . but the US forces now make an effort. The bad PR for treatment of dogs in Vietnam had an effect. Yes, military dogs do get killed. But I'll bet if someone did the stats carefully, I bet they'd find that a trained dog in a combat zone has a higher life expectancy than a puppy placed in a financially troubled family. The fraction of family dogs that end out in shelters or getting run over is pretty awful.

I have had two vets, both of them seem well informed, tell me that you can give the 'monthly' heartworm on a bi-monthly basis and still get adequate protection. The immature heartworm has a slow lifecycle and is vulnerable for a long time . . . One of the vets also says that many dogs can fight heartworm with natural body defenses. But I wouldn't count on that.

I find it ludicrous that we run around killing eachother, but we involve animals all the time and I don't see why 'companions' should be left behind. I'd guess they're a civilizing influence to the troops . .. if they had more dogs around, I'll bet there would be fewer soldiers blowing it on drugs and alcohol, less PTSD, and fewer soldiers loosing their marbles and terrorizing civilians.

It's great to take the Mickey out of a stereotype, and it's true that many young Labs are excitable and a worry around kids. But this worry is with kids they are greeting, not kids that they live with. But I think, in general, Labs good reputation with kids is deserved. I have placed dozens of Lab pups with families with kids. I had only one disaster . . . that was in a family that allowed 3 and 4 year olds to play chase with the puppy and ended out with a puppy that chased and sometimes nipped kids. This was corrected by some behavioural training. Mostly, dogs sense that little ones are physically vulnerable and take a gentle, protective attitude. Labs (and pit bulls) have very high pain tolerance, and thus are likely to withstand ear pulling, poking, getting dressed up, and other things kids do to dogs without getting upset. I don't know how many times I've heard the story about the family Lab that used to go to the bus stop every day to greet the kids when they came home from school (no longer possible, alas). I know a couple people whose kids were saved from drowning by a family Lab.

Hope this doesn't come out harsh. I was always given marks for critical thinking, and seldom promoted for being nice. (Overly analytic, underly polite). I'm a bit geeky and have an image processing related PhD. I find your drawings harsh cause they tend to focus on edges and folds. I think the dogs would look 'nicer' to most people if more attention were given to what's between the edges.

Note, also, running on pavement is much harder on a dog than running on grass. I would feel ok with short runs on grass from a pretty early age.

oops! double post

More devil's advocacy . . . Pedigree dog ownership will continue to decline as breeders become more exclusive in placing main register dogs. In olden days, there wasn't much objection to someone who had a good, though not show quality, dog decided to have a litter and place pups with friends and neighbours. Now this is viewed as sinful. Personally, I don't like the way many breed standards are interpreted in the show ring, and I've seen a lot of desexed pets that I wouldn't mind having a pup from. That is 'plain' and 'average' individuals may be just as good as 'extreme' individuals who win in shows. If you remove the 'plain' from the breeding pool, you may be cutting out the very part of the gene pool that would allow recovery from such things as inability to whelp naturally, high incidence of entropian, or unhealthy skin. To me, pedigree means simply that the lineage is known. Not that the lineage is all individuals who could win a beauty show. (Health tests are another issue . . . but these are not generally done before the decision of 'main' or 'limited'.

I tried one, once. It was a cheap one. My dogs hate it. I've tried them in a boarding kennel, and often come out to find the dog has slept on the floor instead of the bed to avoid the heating pad. Maybe a better one would have had a different outcome. Or maybe thick coated dogs don't like them. Dunno.

Thanks for the correction. Foot in mouth. No it does not apply to Gundogs, used to flush etc, nor does it apply to dogs that dispose of rats, rabbits and the like. (2) A dog is not, for the purposes of subsection (1) (d), to be regarded as being kept or used for the purposes of hunting if it is used only to locate, flush, point or retrieve birds or vermin. "Vermin" for the purposes of this subsection includes small pest animals only (such as rodents). ETA: It's part of the Companion Animals ACT 1998, not a council bylaw.

See http://www.slate.com...ow/2293228/Cats of War The Pentagon's top-secret feline special-operations program, revealed. By Holly Allen and Christopher BeamPosted Thursday, May 5, 2011, at 6:26 PM ET The American commando team that killed Osama Bin Laden in Abbottabad, Pakistan, reportedly included a dog, sparking furious speculation about the dog's identity and discussion of the role of canines in war. Less publicized—and far more essential to top-secret U.S. military operations—are cats. Click to view a slide-show essay on the cats of war.

The commentary on the article was also great. It included lots of comments from service men (all male) who had had dogs, and clarification about rehoming of service dogs. Apparently the Vietnam crew couldn't keep their dogs and many service dogs were abandoned. This has since been corrected, and in many cases, dogs stay with their handler. I'm not doing this justice .. . .I'd recommend going to the link. The article text also made some interesting comments on dog tech . . . and the thousands of bucks they put into providing flack jackets, lights, cameras, GPS, etc when they deploy a dog.

I don't think the issue is who to blame. Blame everyone. Blame no one. Blame the kid. Blame the mom, and while you're at it, blame the dad too. It's sexist to assume the mom was responsible for child containment. Blame the council. Blame the dog owners. Blame, blame, blame, blame . . . useless stuff. It is stupid that the council is trying to prevent by putting restrictions on 'hunting dogs' . . . which presumably includes gun dogs, used to retrieve felled game or flush out birds. Does it include ratters, too? I think the bottom line is that intelligent dog owners need to get more involved in local politics. If they leave decisions to clueless people, you end out with clueless regulations, enforced by clueless people.

Hi Tania This isn't working. You need to try again. I'd suggest 1. Giving your post another title, eg, "Survey on pet shops" subtitle "Year 12 project" 2. Setting it up so that it's easy for viewers to return the survey to you. Very important that your email address works. Give instructions about how to respond. 3. Think the survey through a little more. I've tried to fill it out below . . . I think pet shop sales of live animals are cruel and should be banned. I have not and never will bought/buy an animal from a pet shop (actually, I bought some fish from a pet shop . . . but I don't think you're asking about fish). You should have something in there to tell people like me to skip to question 13. 4. If you're asking about dog or cat, say that . . . not 'pet'. 5. Us oldies have gotten lots of pets from shelters/breeders/etc. It's hard for people in our group to fill out the survey. Make it clearer, please. Good luck Survey 1. What are your thoughts of animals in pet shops? Cruel Unsure Fine Comments: Define 'animal' 2. Would you consider buying an animal from a pet store? Yes No 3. Have you ever brought an animal from a pet shop? Yes No 4. What was it? n.a. 5. Are you happy with the animal? n.a. 6. Why did you get the animal from the pet shop? n.a. 7. Did the animal live with you till the end of its life or still is living with you? n.a. 8. If you answered No for question 5, do you know what happened to the pet? n.a. 9. Reason to give the animal up. (circle answer)  Can’t afford it  Moved housed  Took too much to care for  Too destructive  Not good with kids  No time  Didn’t get on with other animals  Other ________________________________________________________________ 10. Do you know where pet shops get their animals from? Yes No 11. If yes, Where from and how do you know? ________________________________________________________________________________ 12. Does it make you concerned? Yes No 13. Do you think Pet shops are better than shelter pets? Yes No Question doesn't make sense. I think you mean 'pet shop pets' . . . not ;pet shops'. Why/ Why not? ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 14. Have you ever brought an animal from a rescue shelter, group or qualified registered breeder? Yes No What do you mean by a 'group'? I have bought both from a rescue shelter and from a couple registered breeders. How should I answer? 15. Where you happy with the animal? Yes No Two yesses, one no . . . The no was a show dog bought from a breeder. His hip scores came out bad and I re-sold him as a pet. He was a wonderful, beautiful dog. 16. Did the animal live with you till the end of its life or is it still living with you? Yes No Thank you very much for filling out my survey.

Very sad for you. Poor pup. Fingers crossed that it turns out to be poor positioning on the X-ray or a vet who doesn't know their stuff. I imported a pup -- main register, intended for show and stud work. Sire and dam and some generations back had good hip/elbow scores. He turned out to be a stunning dog, but unfortunately had bad hips (total score 23) and was rehomed as a pet with a family who understood he needed to be kept lean. I had discussed health guarantees with the breeder before buying the pup and she said she doesn't give them. I chalked it up as bad luck. In answer to your question . . . with unpredictable and non-preventable defects, the breeder has as much responsibility as they choose to take. Most breeders have a consistent policy and stick to it. In my opinion, that is what they should do . . . and they should communicate the policy to puppy buyers. But most of what breeders should do is on the prevention side . . . . careful selection of sire and dam, clear care instructions to puppy buyers. Occasionally someone gets a good lawyer and forces a breeder to take more responsibility. If a lot of cases go legal or highly public, I can see the animal rights types starting campaigns to end the breeding of giant breeds . . .

Very true RSG but if the dogs had been declared dangerous and contained in accordance with DD regs, they'd have been in a roofed pen. I doubt the child could have gotten to them. The kid was a four year old! The gate couldn't have been much if the child entered the yard. Kids do sneak out of the house and go walkabout. I hope they win the lawsuit, and the council, and other councils as well, get the message that DD regs need to be enforced. Poor parents.