sandgrubber

I hate u-tube posts cause I always have to check out the others shown alongside and end out burning up both time and bandwidth. It is amazing how 'in tune' dogs can be with human motion. I can't see it as cruel. Costumes look a little silly, but hey, what's wrong with silly. This one brought up a horrid horrid 'dance' of two SWF's in a plexiglass cage supposedly dancing the meringue . . . that bothered me.

I get more cautious if I know there's parvo going around. The 4 wk pups may be better protected than the older pup . . . if Mum's antibodies were strong. I think most parvo deaths are in pups at least 8 weeks of age and quite a few happen in pups that were vaccinated once, or even twice. Sometimes vaccines don't take. Happy to be corrected if I'm wrong.

They're all from the same genus and the same species. The amazing thing about dogs is how strongly they differentiate, not how alike they are as newborns.

So long as you have steriotypes, you're going to have media bias. Remember the 'God's Rottweiler' tag bantered about when the current Pope was nominated? Note the frequency with which Labbies are used on product labels to convey a loveable image. I've come across pit bull imagery in some pretty old novels used to describe vicious people. Steriotypes are hard to eliminate cause they strike a cord. I think the only way you'll get rid of media bias is by creating more, and stronger images of the 'bad' breed being 'good'. Lots of people are trying to do this . . . and making progress here and there. But it's a long, slow process.

I'm sure you'll find there are speyed bitches showing in the veterans class . . . and people not bothering to report they've been speyed. It's almost impossible to tell.

Tried Google. The most 'balanced' statement I can find says: "there is a possibility that some of the available heartworm preventive medications may not be entirely safe to administer to dogs harboring heartworms." It recommends annual testing whether or not you gap cause sometimes dogs spit out meds, meds are not 100% effective, and some people skip without realising they have done so. Pretty mild statement on the dangers of taking meds without testing. Strong statement made, however, on what an awful affliction heartworm is. Author is a US vet who claims to stay current on the Vet literature. Read more at Suite101: Does Your Dog Need a Yearly Heartworm Test?: Annual Heartworm Tests for Dogs: Are They Necessary or Not? http://www.suite101.com/content/does-your-...4#ixzz10YXMbpac

ditto, except it was HRT tablets. The vet said 'don't worry, it will have no effect.

What's grown up? If you mean physical neotony, the squashed in face breeds are all puppies. . .and a case could be made for smaller breeds too; and long nosers are more wolf-like. If you mean behaviour you get a different set of answers. I think you need to consider DNA evidence, thus publications written before the dog genome was published add historical interest but can't be taken too seriously.

I think my vet in Oz said that it used to be the case that meds were dangerous to dogs who were already infected, but the modern versions were generally safe. I'm pretty sure she said HeartGuard was fine, and the injectable didn't require prior testing . . . I can't remember that she said "but if you use X,Y or Z you MUST test first". I seem to remember reading that Sentinel and Revolution were safe, too. So which ones are dangerous?

My father always had tubal ligation done on his dogs (ok bitches). He liked dogs to have sex but didn't want puppies. Ok, a little crazy, anthropromorphic, and all that. The tubal is a much simpler operation than a full spey. It can very easily be tacked on to the end of a C-section . . . tying the tubes once the bitch has been cut open is a trivial job. But it does not give the same protection against oestrogen-stimulated diseases that a full spey does, and the girl will still come into season. Not sure whether a tube-tied girl is considered neutered or not when it comes to showing . . . but no one will know the difference.

In the US you have to test for heartworm and get a script to buy tablets. My Australian vet told me that testing wasn't necessary (hope I'm not loosing my memory). US Americans seem to think you can kill your dog by giving tablets if the dog is already infected. I can't remember ever hearing this in Australia. Curious about the difference.

Flame suit ready and the fire retardant is on hand. My parents allowed bitser bitches to have a couple litters when I was growing up. I think us kids learned a lot from it. No disasters. They were hardy little girls. My parents died years ago, so I can't ask them what happened to the pups . . . it probably wasn't good news. When I ran a boarding kennel, I ran into a lot of people who wanted to perpetuate their lines -- bitser lines. Some of them had lovely tempered older dogs who were in great health, and I can understand why they might want to keep a pup. There are some exceptionally good dogs who don't have a pedigree In the farm situation, neighbours asking for pups was a good reason to have a litter . . . in times past . .. and my guess is this sort of logic played a big role in the development of many working breeds, especially before the pedigree system was organised. Yes there are a lot of idiots out there who don't know what they are getting into and who will ultimately be adding to the unloved and unwanted dog population. But I can see why people might want to perpetuate a line . . . pedigree or not. It's an old tradition and still has some merit. Also, I think you'll be more successful in twisting arms by sympathising than blanket condemnation.

My understanding: the larger the litter, the smaller the pups on average, and hence the lower the chance of getting stuck and the easier to get the breach pups and other trouble makers out. So I'd agree with the others about going natural and having a backup plan. Might add, with smaller and more pups you have a greater risk of loosing a pup or two. A good vet can reduce this risk by doing a Ceasar, though an emergency Ceasar may be as good or better than an elective for this purpose. The only Rotti breeder I talk to regularly has horrid problems with bitches rejecting (as in wanting to kill) pups. Hand rearing 12 is a big job. I'm not saying it's a breed trait or something to worry about, but you might do well to find out about the grand dam's maternal instancts, and prepare yourself if they aren't good.

The hitch is, can Dogs QLD enforce their opinion. I'd guess it might be hard to keep the 'not for export' attached to the papers that follow the semen, and even if it were attached, some places may not consider the stipulation valid/legal. So it comes down to a big MAYBE.

There's a new book, written by Jim Gorant of Sports Illustrated, on the Vick case. It's getting good reviews. Haven't read it yet, but looks worth a read. Here's the Amazon Link: Google and you'll get many more. It was officially published four days ago. There's an interview with Gorant on US Nat Public Radio coming up shortly . . . I'll add the podcast link when it comes up. Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/Lost-Dogs-Michael-Re...n/dp/1592405509 The interview can be found here

I'd guess you can export a dog or bitch with 'not for export' pedigree, but you'd run into trouble when you tried to get the pedigree registered in the new location. The canine authorities power doesn't go much beyond what animal can and cannot be put on a pedigree register or shown. As for semen, unless it is written into the pedigree stipulations that neither the dog nor his progeny can be exported . . . which could be done and might cause problems with registration of a pedigree . .. I'd say you're fine. At least in WA there is space on the back of the pedigree for the seller to add stipulations.

Most of mine bleed heavily on the first season . . . but I did have one girl who I though was pretty old not to have come in season (20 months). I took her to a repro vet for diagnosis and he said "no problem . . . she's been on season, you just missed it". And I'll bet there are plenty people out there who have only found out about the girl having had her first season when it's apparent that pups are on the way.

If the water isn't frozen, it's not too cold for a Labrador :D . When I lived in New Hampshire mine used to love going into the river when there was lots of ice about. Only worry was that they would get swept under the ice (which never happened). As for kelpies, in my experience, most of 'em dislike getting wet . . . so if the kelpie part dominates, you won't have to worry. The dog just won't go in. Remember, Labbies were derived from dogs used to pull in fishing nets in the very cold, stormy seas off the east coast of Canada.

If it's a dominant trait and invariably shows up by 7 yrs, I'd say you can breed it out by only breeding from pups whose sire and dam have lived to old age. No? I fault not Cav breeders, but the pedigree registration system. Age of death needs to be recorded on pedigrees if you want to breed dogs that live to a healthy old age. It really irked me when I lost my first brood bitch to cancer and tried to take her off the records. The CAWA person behind the desk said, basically, "why bother . .. some people out there have hundreds of deceased dogs still on the books".

Will there be an experienced vet nurse around? Could make quite a difference if you end out going in for an emergency and the vet is a horse guy/

My record for frozen is 0,0,10. However, there were extenuating factors on the two zeros. Both bitches failed to produce to natural matings after the AI was tried. The 10 had had three litters of 10 previously, including both natural and chilled semen. I think the real question is not frozen vs fresh vs natural, but whether or not you do prog testing. I suspect that the main reason people get small litters from bitches that could produce large litters is cause they think 'the dog' knows, or use some other behavioural thing, and get the timing off. I'm sure some of the behavioural ques work well . . . for some people. But I also know they mess up sometimes for some people.

Does anyone know of any programs to train police on how to deal with aggressive dogs? I'd say the dogs in question got off lightly not being shot on the spot, and the coppers were probably doing the best they could with the tools on hand. Maybe they just got the tasers and wanted to try them out. Who knows. Unless people are trained in advance about how best to handle a situation, they'll improvise. Second all the anti-breedist remarks, and the 'scum owner' remarks.

Hope it's not rude to comment without reading ALL 13 pages here. I've been in California for the last 6 mo where pinch collars are everywhere. The local feed store has two types of collars . . . flat and pinch/prong. I have seen half a dozen pit bulls in people's front yards with the pinch/prong collar on . . . and I don't spend that much time in town. My neighbour, who does Schutz with her GSD's, routinely uses one. I've been playing around on Google to try and find stories about prong collars doing damage and come up, almost entirely, with people who are in favour of their use. I used one on my own dogs a couple years back . . . to reduce pulling. They understood instantly with the prong collar. Still enthusiastic about the walk. No avoidance of the collar at all. And after about two weeks we went back to the Martingale . . . but got no pulling. http://www.8pawsup.com/articles/training/prongcollars.html gives some evidence that they're much much less likely to damage a dog than choke chains. The people out to bust myths had a go at the Anna Marie Silverton advice, which apparently quotes a hard-to-find (non-existent?) German study. However, people chiming in on the conversation seem to confirm that choking is much worse for the dog than pinching.

Great article. Thanks for posting. btw, when did the points system go by the wayside? I would love to see it used.

What do they consider HD free. The worst I've gotten for a dog of my lines raised on my property is 3:1 . . . which I consider to be a non-problem, though not perfect. In my experience, there are quite a few Lab lines that run low hip scores. Lab averages are not that bad compared to other breeds . . . I don't know why they have a reputation for bad hips. Sandgrubber, Congratulations on having a line of Labs with no HD problems! You really should let some of the research teams know you have line of labs free of HD disease. They really need to look at what you have done to accomplish this and the genetics of your dogs. Your dogs could hold the genetic key for HD free dogs of all breeds. Cornell is using Labs right now in the search for genes. However the Labs are used as the affected line not the line free of HD genetics. They are using a different breed for the line that does not carry the genes. Usinfg 2 different breeds makes it harder to find the genes. I am sure your HD free labs would prove very valuable in their research.