sandgrubber

I don't find any of these claims bizarre. Have had my dogs do similar things, fortunately without ending out at the vets. I guess they chew a bit more than some of the dogs described . . . cause the pieces of rubber ducky generally show up in the poohs. Medicine . . . had a dog eat a sheet of HRT estrogen tablets, and another had a good time with a whole 100 bottle of worming tablets. Called vet . . . in both cases was told to watch for signs of trouble . . . but there were no problems. Almost every dog I've owned has chewed up sticks / wood at some point.

Would be interesting to know more about the dog . . . like how it was trained and cared for or whether it had a veterinary problem. Given the increasing demand for scent-detection dogs, it could be that there are some shonky operators training them. It should be possible to screen for dogs with extremely low potential for aggression. Reminded of the Monterey case where a police dog (trained in Europe) got loose and killed a dog. Such things just shouldn't happen.

Now that this one has been thoroughly chewed over and the details are out, I would say the Council would be within its rights to sue the paper for libel. It's definitely inflammatory (not to mention, poorly edited) and misleading in its presentation of the facts.

Good on you for deciding to desex . . . but don't fool yourself that you could make 'good money' from pups. There are people that do so, but most of them have put a lot of study into the exercise and are highly selective about how they do it. There are a lot more people who end out in sad, expensive situations when they decide to have a litter and something goes wrong.

six dogs plus boarding kennel. Kennel zone (special rural which was renamed resource zone).

While the intent of the list is great, and its good to see some short description of 'why' foods are bad . . . I think it tends to cause unnecessary alarm by putting things that may be poison to some dogs, things that are poison only in large amounts, and things that contain toxins but the toxins aren't really available to the dogs. If we were to write a similar list for children we'd end out with Burgers, chips, coke, nuggets, etc . .. tend to lead to obesity Peanuts (and most other nuts) . . . known to cause fatal allergic reactions Booze of all sorts . . . may make them crazy and can be addictive Liver, in large quantities . . . fat chance this will happen Licorice interferes with the absorbtion of something (potassium?) Brazil nuts may result in excess selenium . .. Banana skins . .. . . . etc. Few people would read that as saying never allow your kids to have burgers . . . and most would understand that only a few percent of the population has nut allergies, but those can be quite severe. Never heard of a kid OD'ing on liver . . . Regarding the egg question, for a medium/large dog, a few whole eggs a week is fine. I wouldn't recommend separating out the yolks and give the dogs half a dozen whites on a regular basis. Pips (apple, pear, cherry) do contain cyanide, but they almost always go right through, and cause no problems . . . all my dogs have gotten apple cores . . . cherries are too dear so they rarely get them. My dogs (Labbies ... devoted gutsers all) all hate raw mushrooms of any sort . . . they grab anything that drops on the kitchen floor and if it's a mushroom . . . or an onion . . . they drop it immediately.

*scratches head* People actually have to ask the RSPCA to do this? They don't do it automatically? A-mazing. In WA (at least Perth) I don't think the RSPCA even handles missing dog reports. My neighbours adopted a stray and called around everywhere they could think of to register the dog as found. I remember being amazed that the RSPCA wasn't interested in missing dog information. Organisations that use a lot of volunteer help sometimes have procedures that seem strange, as well as people who don't follow procedures.

People love their pets as family members. In my book, allowing your dog to kill another person's pet is a felony, similar to rape or GBH, and should be pinned on the owner of the dog, with heavy fines and possible jail sentence. Especially where the dog has a history of attacking other animals. A dangerous dog declaration is not nearly harsh enough.

If you want a bit more bang for your squirt . . . spike the water with perfume or ammonia or something . . . not strong enough to hurt the cat . . . but enough to help it decide that your house is an EVIL place. My mother used to do this with neighbours cats who hung around her bird feeder . . . it worked pretty well and gave her great satisfaction. she bought something like an AK47 squirt gun rather than a bottle.

There are some great people who are naive about dogs. It's sad. Unfortunately, lots of oops litters have similar stories attached. The results are often the opposite of designer dogs . . . animals whose cross breed pedigree tends to turn people off, and which have a relatively poor chance of ending up in good homes unless the owners put a lot of effort into homing them. Lets hope its a small litter and causes them so much grief that they go for the spey job.

I found this out the hard way... very sick dog and he only ate 1 or 2. My Labbies have had a few Macas with no ill effects . . . but they're big dogs. At $30/kg I'm not about to offer them a big bowl full . . . and Macas usually disappear within a few hours after arriving in my house, so the dogs aren't in much danger. They eat melon rinds gladly, in pretty large quantities, with no ill effects.

Some of both. I have six Labbies at the moment. One swims in the fish pond at least six times a day. Most take the occasional dip, especially when it's hot. One pup, who had a scary experience with water when she was 8 weeks old, is cautious and only goes in up to her belly. My first Labbie in Australia did not like water, nor did her sire.

Personally, I accept the argument that the costs of a longer waiting period are hard to justify, given the stats on people claiming their dogs after 3 days plus. It would make far more sense into putting funds into a RELIABLE record-keeping system that ensures that dogs listed as missing don't get the green dream without their owner's being notified. Preferably, a statewide or national system, cause missing pets sometimes cross shire boundaries. Maybe a system that permits filing an ID photo along with the rego . . . I'm amazed to hear people complaining about dog registration costs. I spent some time in Germany. There people pay hundreds of dollars a year for dog registration, regardless of whether the dog is entire or desexed. I believe this is the case throughout northern Europe. Keeping dogs does have social costs, and it's fair that dog owners pay some of those costs. It would, however, be good to see a better connection between registration fees and services delivered . . . so that there would be a way for councils to say to dog owners "You want more services, are you prepared to pay?' . . . and dog owners to say to councils, "we pay $XXx/yr . .. what are we getting for our dollar?"

Very sad, and also scary. If anyone knows of a charity that supports mass dog vaccinations in Bali, please post details.

Sh#t happens. I feel for both the kid and his family and the dog's owners. I don't blame the family for jumping to the absurd-by-my-standards conclusion that all 'big' dogs should be muzzled. Most likely they have little understanding of dogs, and now they're going to be very very fearful as well as not understanding. There's no way they will find enough support to make a muzzle requirement happen. The dog owner may not be blameless. A dog that takes a sideways bite without warning has probably done something like that before, and the owner probably should have taken stronger control measures. But we all should have done some things that we don't actually do.

As with Centitout, most of my pups go to family homes. My priorities, in order, are health, temperament, and conformation; a range of temperament is ok. Some people are athletic and want a fun-loving boisterous pup. Others want something more cuddly and sooky. I have found, in the 10 years I've been breeding, that the sire has a large effect on temperament: different litters from the same dam appear to have come from a different mold. I steer away from boys that are known to be extremely stubborn, high strung, or, god forbid HA or DA (almost never seen in Labbies). If I expect, based on sire and dam, a litter to be more active, or more placid, I tell the puppy buyers my expectations. Also try to screen temperament and give people the pup that better suits their wishes. Of course my predictions aren't always right. Sometimes the apparently retiring pup turns out to be a maniac when he or she is no longer in competition with littermates. Of course nurture is critical. But that's not under my control past the first eight weeks. I try to select homes that have lots of time and love to give their puppy and give good advice, but ultimately socialisation is up to the family.

Unless your dog is quite stupid (in dog terms) or not-desexed and in search of a mate, you can pretty much count on it returning . . . if it doesn't get hurt, captured, or killed. But chasing a rabbit or roo may mean this return takes an hour of two (for an energetic, gamey dog). The critical thing is understanding local hazards, such as busy roads, people with stock who may shoot trespassing dogs, horses who may kick, bitches on season, Rangers, 1080 baits, etc. Also note that two or more dogs working as a pack will often go much further away than one.

My girls don't like the air con unless it's really stinking hot. they'd rather lie in the wet dirt behind the rosemary bushes. The only place I have air con is in my bedroom . . . and if it's 26+ through the night, I can't sleep without aircon. they are free to come into the bedroom on such nights, if they want.

I don't understand the bolded part of the above. If pups aren't partially weaned, NO VISITORS. Full stop. I start weaning at 3 to 4 weeks. I allow visits when weaning is well underway and pups have outgrown the whelping box, eyes open, walking fairly well. My girls are great mothers, but not protective when people visit. I leave it natural when people visit. Mum can come and go if she chooses or nick off is she chooses (she usually says 'hi' and nicks off. Often she will come back for a quick round of feeding the pups). Other dogs are free to interact with people and pups. Often they compete for attention from potential puppy buyers. Mum isn't spending a lot of time with pups at 4 weeks plus, and I don't allow visits earlier. Often she is a bit ratty-looking cause nursing mums tend to molt, especially in summer. I explain this. Most people understand. I think this is typical for Labradors. Other breeds may be more protective, and a more structured approach may be required. btw. I think the health risks to pups increase from 4 to 8 weeks, as the maternal antibodies become less effective. Thus I'm happy to have people visit at ~4 weeks and stay away until they pick up their pup.

I don't understand the bolded part of the above. If pups aren't partially weaned, NO VISITORS. Full stop. I start weaning at 3 to 4 weeks. I allow visits when weaning is well underway and pups have outgrown the whelping box, eyes open, walking fairly well. My girls are great mothers, but not protective when people visit. I leave it natural when people visit. Mum can come and go if she chooses or nick off is she chooses (she usually says 'hi' and nicks off). Other dogs are free to interact with people and pups. Often they compete for attention from potential puppy buyers. Mum isn't spending a lot of time with pups at 4 weeks plus, and I don't allow visits earlier.

I don't understand. Are you saying pups went to vets who made mountains out of molehills cause the pup was insured? If so, why not suggest that people avoid certain vets? A vet happy to clean out an insurance company a vet that deserves to be boycotted.

I've noticed a few people sell pups that they claim are toilet trained at 8 weeks. My pups all want to be toilet trained. I put them in a large enclosure (~20 sq metres) with a more sheltered 'nest' area and a few habitats when they are able to walk. They (95%) do their poos on the perimeter, away from the sleeping area. Less discerning with wees. How does one channel the instinctive desire to keep the nest clean into something that makes it easier for puppy buyers when the pups go to their new homes?

Towels, piled a few layers thick in summer, sometimes with an old blanket or two or vet-bed equivalent underneath. The absorbent bed covers they use in convalescent homes (very similar to vet bed) in winter. No newspaper. It's slippery when wet and slows down the pups' learning of motor skills. I hate handling it; and it reminds me of pet shops. If you use cloth stuff it helps to have a 9 kg washing machine.

Lolap . . . your post brings tears. How awful. You must feel gutted. Here's hoping Mr Stubbs makes it all worthwhile.

I don't understand this point. A proper, game-bred APBT is a dog suited to pit fights. That it's a disgusting practice and one which is thankfully outlawed is irrelevant, as is the fact that nobody in their right mind would "advertise" them as such. But it's a fact. The dogs are bred to enjoy fighting another dog and to not give up. Does this mean you do support BSL, because they are bred to enjoy fighting other dogs? I don't think there's a breed standard for the APBT in Australia, though I may be wrong. but yes, if there were a breed standard that implied DA was good, I would support BSL. If an animal is deliberately bred, up front, according to a recognised standard, to be dangerous to other animals (or people) I think it is appropriate that the Law step in and make sure there are provisions . . . eg, extreme penalties for allowing the dog to run free, requirements to hold liability insurance, restriction of the breed from off-lead dog parks, etc. that protect the public from idiots that favor a breed out of a macho taste for brawn and potential blood sport.