sandgrubber

I'm happy not to be in the boarding kennel business any more. It's a huge amount of work and lots of responsibility for not much income. I don't like the idea of government meddling in kennel standards any more than I like the idea of government meddling in breeding standards. It may be a good idea . . . but it seem likely that rules will be framed badly. When I was in the business I found the guidance toward 'cover your backside' contracts came from the Companion Animal Boarding Association . . . which handed out a 'generic' lawyer-developed boarding contract that relieved owners of responsibility for illness, loss or accident and gave them power to dispose of animals at will if the owners were absent for more than 2 weeks after their supposed pickup date. This was around the time of the Tsunami disaster and we had quite a few clients in Bali . . . I dropped the contract around that time and went without contract. But that is risky. Steve mentioned checking daily. We got in trouble with that one once. We watched our dogs pretty carefully, and we were good about picking up behavour changes, limping, etc. but we didn't do a daily feel-down. How closely we monitored was determined, in part, by the dogs. A few wouldn't allow a 'strange' person to touch their front/flanks/rear unless they were restrained . . . checking for ticks on such dogs would have been a nightmare (fortunately we didn't have paralysis ticks in our area). Ok, if they were in for several weeks, they learn the routine, and most get so that they tolerate 'feeling'. But a lot of dogs are in for a week or less and unless you're a dog whisperer, some of them are difficult to deal with. The dog we got in trouble about was a one year old male Weim who wouldn't tolerate touching. He was in with his dam and a male sibling. We let the three play together. They loved running but were mouthy about their play. One boy got a tooth into the other boy and ended out with a pretty good puncture wound, which was little visible. We might have caught it if it weren't Xmas, but it was Xmas, and everyone was overworked. So the wound got infected and the vet bill got expensive . . . we paid out (or reduced the bill, can't remember exactly). The client never came back. I still feel bad about it. But shite happens. We were charging ~$14.50/day for the dog . . . great price competition in our area . . . and economics wouldn't support hiring enough staff/staff with adequate skills to do a systematic check of every dog every day, especially not at Xmas. There are also problems, such as bloat, that just happen, and are hard to guard against in a boarding kennel setting. And if you are rural in that sort of area, snake bite may be a possibility. In the ~5 years I had the kennel we had two or three incidents where an individual dog got a serious tick infestation. I don't know where this came from. Bandicoots? A dog that came in with first instar ticks and they became highly visible at the time it went home? A dog who was a tick-magnet? No idea why one dog would get hit while the other 20 in the yards seemed to be fine. If the government gets involved in such things, we'll all be spraying on a regular basis with highly carcinogenic chemicals to kill ticks. Though laissez faire has some bad outcomes . . . I think it may be better to let the bad kennels get kicked around by lawsuits and people badmouthing them than to try to legislate standards of care.

If I remember rightly, the average building height downtown Shanghai is around 10 stories. Sounds like a sensible policy. Too many dogs per acre makes for big problems. Good on them for allowing people to keep the dogs they already have.

True, in the short term. But if Mars is funding research, over time, it will affect what the universities study . . . sadly, money attracts research, and it's hard to do decent research without funding.

Thanks guys . . . glad to know it's not unknkown behaviour. Doesn't worry me, just weird. K9 sexuality is so different from human . . . or maybe it isn't . . . we just repress much more than they do.

Doesn't take a PhD to see this thread is seriously off topic.

Why not take it a step further and really maximize heterozygosity. Choose breeds that are a maximum distance apart on the K9 family tree, as established by DNA sequencing. Ie, breed the Asiatic group to modern hunting dogs. It's so sad that we're on the verge of understanding the genetic basis of many diseases, and the powers that be have decided that the key to health is mix-em-up with no regard to what genes cause what strengths and weaknesses.

Wonderful! I'll bet Ms Beatha Lee does a great job!

If that's scientific, I'm ashamed to be a scientist. I'd welcome a test that avoided doubling up on segments of code that carry risk of harmful recessive traits. But aiming to maximize the potential genetic heterozygosity, irrespective of what the genes do does makes no sense. Say, for example, some bits of code make for a healthy heart or strong immune system or low risk of HD. I'd like low heterozygosity in those regions of code, thank you very much.

I have a 7 year old entire Lab bitch and her 13 mo old granddaughter. They are good mates, play together, sleep lying on one another, etc. The old lady humps the pup from time to time. But the weird one, which I've only seen twice, is the pup occasionally goes for the old girl's teats . . .it really looks like she's trying to nurse. While she does it she pumps her hips and spine in a sexual sort of way. The old girl puts up with it for awhile, but eventually tells the pup off. What the heck is going on? Does anyone else get this behaviour?

Good to hear that one very stupid bit of breed specific legislation has been relaxed. Sure, greyhounds were bred for running down prey. So were all sight hounds. And there are greys . . . and dozens of other breeds . . . who find it good sport to run down a cat or SWF. I'm sure there are greyhound trainers who encourage the blood-sport aspect of the chase. The law should go after those trainers . . . not the dogs.

There are lots of things in the market that I think are overpriced, not to mention badly made, poor quality, etc. My response: Don't buy them. It's a market. People can charge what they want. Sometimes the price reflects production costs. Sometimes, rarity. Sometimes, a degree of monopoly. Sometimes it's smoke, mirrors, fashion, and hype. This is as true with dogs as anything else. I don't see why people get so exercised about this topic.

Actually Elina says: "Of course we have problems as well, but we have quite strict Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act. I'd like to hear more about what the rules are, both for breeders and for pets . . . and how they are enforced. When I lived in Germany with a dog, I seem to remember there were quite a few rules and very high licensing fees. What was different was that people would tell you off if you broke rules . . . leaving much less for the equivalents of the RSPCA and rangers to do. The breed mix was quite different too. I'm in the US (California) now. It's more like Australia than Northern Europe.

Great story, but probably not true. All the 'ashes' I've seen come out of a crematorium had pretty good chunks of bone in them and couldn't be mistaken for coke.

Paul . . . could you please note where this was extracted from and provide contacts for Caroline Le Couteur. I think this discussion would be more productive if there were more dialog between the sides and less preaching to the choir.

There are many Lab breeders who have chocolates . . . including Driftway and Blackboy. Chocolate shows up in a few prominent Lab lines (eg, descendents of Master Mariner). A number of breeders have been working hard to import quality chocolate stock. I see no shame in charging more for chocolate pups . . . if you pay to import stock and/or do frozen semen AI to get the best quality stud, it's fair to pass on the costs. And if supply can't keep up with demand price will rise. What's wrong with breeding to meet market demand IF you don't sacrifice health, temperament, or conformation. It can be done . . . but requires working a little harder to find the right dog. I'd suggest just going to the DOL puppy ads. You'll find lots of chocos. Then weed out breeders who don't test, who show bad test results, and whose lines don't show quality . . . and if some of them are too expensive, give 'em a miss too. Another good strategy is to figure out what choco stud dogs you like (personally, I like Berolee William Trigg, IMP UK, at Blackhills Labradors in NZ) and check to see who has used them. People who take the trouble to use a really good dog are likely to be working toward quality.

I think feral is a great label for wild, loud, undisciplined, kids who show no respect for others and take responsibility for nothing. I've met a few of 'em. That aside, I'd like to complement everybody for not taking the denial route. I appreciate the absence of 'who says it's a Labrador, show me a photo, it may be an ill-bred one, my dogs will allow you to take a bone out of their mouths, . . . blah blah blah . . . yes, some Labs are resource guarders. Many are not. One more thing for breeders to keep in mind and to try and purge from their bloodlines. What an awful comment, I would never describe any child as a "feral".

"You don ' t stop laughing because you grow old, You grow old because you stop laughing!!!"

I'm confused. German friends of mine have told me that their kennel club (details lost in translation) disapproves of litters of over six pups, and that it is common practice to pick the best six and euthanise the rest early. Can someone clarify if this is an 'old' attitude that has been changed?

I think it's great that the Brits celebrate ugliness. This guy certainly qualifies!!!!! Personally, I think some breeds are ugly, full stop . . . and I tend to love them for it. Time for Australia, and the US (I'm a dual) start their own ugly dog contests As for whether this guy should be pts . .. I'd say you'd have to be a eugenicist/nazi to say advocate that unless he shows some health defect that dooms him to a life of pain.

I'd like to know too . . . and I'm sure others would. It's easy to distort and/or slander if the source is kept secret. How do you know this, lillysmum? I sent you a PM...this is not for general info on the board.

If you don't like what your council is doing, get involved . . . or at least talk to the people who represent you to find out what is going on. If the k9 community doesn't get involved, it's sure to get increasingly constrained.

Hi Thanks for not taking offense . . . much improved. I agree with the original sentiment . . . puppies are great for bringing a smile and making the heart go pitter pat. I think it's the puppy farmers who most try to convince people that buying a puppy will bring happiness . . . and don't heed the responsibility that must go along with that joy. I know you're not one of them. As for stepping on toes. Sometimes its hard not to. But I think there are ways to select puppy buyers that aren't snobbish and still consider the welfare of the dog throughout its life. . . and that make sure, when you do make a mistake and select the wrong household, the people feel they will have the support of the breeder in finding a new home for the pup. Hi there, I have had that quotation on my DOL posts for a long time now but I might change it now. Thanks for the prompt. I see a lot of very sad people and situations and I see what joy that babies (of any kind) can bring. Every time I take a puppy out somewhere with me, I see faces light up. The same can be said of a kitten, or a chicken, or of a human baby. New lives do bring joy to people. I do not go around touting that everyone should buy a puppy. When I have bred and sold puppies ( in very small numbers) I am always very careful who they are sold to and I still hear from the buyers of those puppies many years later. But I do like to spread a little joy in a world that already has too much sadness. We cannot buy happiness (as an individual component) but if we commit to sharing 15 years of our lives to caring for a puppy/dog then we can indeed be buying 15 years of happiness and have many great memories to carry through after that. btw it is not a quotation that I have used anywhere else. I hope your Christmas season is full of joy and if you have any little puppies in your life at the moment, that they bring you much joy too. Souff

I agree that the owner is to blame . . . but I also suspect there are half a dozen . . . or more . . . people who watched the neglect and did nothing. Passive observers are not without blame. It's hard to get rid of negligent owners . . . but good if someone intervenes before the neglect becomes a matter of life or death for the poor animal.

Pitied, ok, but lets hope that most of them get stopped before they get to their first dozen animals.

It would be interesting to see the details on this. What is the 40% increase in demand for their services about? Is it an increase of dogs/cats/etc in shelters? more calls relating to cruelty? more nuisance complaints? all of the above? I am sure there are some overpaid stuffed shirts in the RSPCA. . . . as with most any 'Royal' charity. But is there a larger problem? and is that problem related to the call for mandatory desexing?