sandgrubber

If I didn't have puppy buyers, I wouldn't breed. If I were breeding specifically and only for puppy buyers I wouldn't bother with importing semen, etc. and I wouldn't have clean health sheets (avg hip score total of 3, no elbow scores, all PRA clear) for all my breeding dogs. The California examples of desexing legislation show that it DOES reduce the number of unwanted dogs and cats without causing distress to legitimate breeders of pedigree dogs. quote: To achieve this, they hint at legislation. After all, who better to condemn the docking of a puppy's tail than the person who will, in a few weeks time, slice open her abdomen to remove a healthy uterus? That is scare mongering. Vets vary widely in their level of education regarding pedigree dogs, and in their attitudes toward tail docking, declawing, desexing, etc. Many of them disapprove of some breed standards . . . but so do a lot of breeders. It's really sad to hear of abreed that, in many cases, are incapable of natural mating or natural whelping. It is sad to see some breeds with large fractions of the population suffering from HD. To say it's a bad thing that someone HINTS at legislation is to deny free speach. You'll find extremists who hint at all sorts of things. The extremist who wrote this piece is hinting that the dog police want to impose forced sterilisation on healthy pedigree dogs. But most of the 'healty uteruses' that vets remove are in pets whose owners, for a combination of behavioural and birth-control reasons, choose to have the pet neutered. Some also do desexing for rescue organisations. Is that so horrible? People have been desexing animals for hundreds of years . . . the practice is so widespread that there is a special word for the castrated male of many domestic animals (gelding, steer, etc.). As for breed standards . . .read the reactions to the recent posting in the general discussion forum of an old book on pedigree dogs. Lots of people think that breeds have gone downhill through a century or so of breeding . . . that the old stock looked better. Or read the many acrid debates about the show GSD. How is it ok for the pedigree dog community to forbid a breeder from getting more than four litters from a healthy brood bitch, with the result that she will either have her healthy uterus removed, or she will be at risk of some nasty diseases . . . but not ok for someone outside the breeders community to hint that laws might be enacted to require sterilisation of dogs with genetic diseases?

This thread needs something other than a nodding chorus. I'd class the article as scare mongering. Given how widely the right to breed is abused, and given how many pups are born each year who will end up meeting a sad fate cause not enough good homes are available, I think 'spey and neuter' is a reasonable mantra. The situation would be improved by having more than a mantra. I think all dogs, including pedigree dogs, would be better off if the right were converted to a privalege with attendant responsibilities . . . eg, vet checks and adherence to basic health standards. This would do more to discourage puppy farmers than pedigree dog breeders. Mandatory spey-neuter laws have not stopped pedigree dog breeders in Santa Cruz and other counties in California where such laws are in place. Nor do they result in the dog police (SPCA) going door to door looking for entire dogs. They, in conjunction with education campaigns and subsidized spey/neuter clinics have cut down rates of impoundment and euthanasia. See http://articles.sfgate.com/2007-06-09/news...hoice-neutering. Btw, APBT's are openly bred and sold in Sta Cruz . . . see http://www.scmkennels.com/ . . . note they do not require that all pups be desexed, or forced to wear gear designating them as dangerous dogs. I don't hear anyone threatening rare breeds by mandatory spey/neuter laws.

Great news! Hope a test follows and breeders will be able to work the disease out of their bloodlines. I knew a compusive tail chasing Bull Terrier years ago . . . not a pretty thing at all. Could anyone work out what the mode of inheritance was for this one? Sort of sounds like incomplete dominance?

Yes the poison is poison. The question is dosage. It takes a lot more poison to kill a dog than a mouse. So unless your dog is very small, the amount of poison needed to kill a mouse should do no noticable damage . . . not that it will do any good . . . and not that eating a dozen poisoned mice would be a good thing. At least that's what our local exterminator -- who also breeds Rottis -- told me.

She whelped at 63 days. We did a Ceasar .. . because it was a large litter of large puppies and she has a history of loosing a pup or two in whelping. 10 healthy pups.

Smackos are WAY too salty :D and I don't like the grittyness in most biscuits. The roo mince I buy is often made from little grey kangaroos . . . which taste much gamier than the red roos. It has been inspected for hyatid, though. As for chicken carcasses, I occasionally make soup from them, and when a nice fresh one comes through with a big breast remaining on it, I sometimes use it to make curry chicken (well cooked). Haven't gotten sick from it yet. Btw, a lot of the things we eat are unfit for human consumption.

There are a couple hundred species of ant in Australia. You're not going to be able to get rid of all ants on your property, and to target the problem species, presuming the ants are the source of the problem, it would help to know something about where it nests and what it feeds on. With the right information you may be able to find a highly specific poison, eg, something that the adult ants will take back to their nests and poison their young. The modern, highly targeted poisons of this sort work well with social insects and can be used in ways that aren't dangerous to dogs. But they require some information on the target species. Most ants hate water. If you just want to keep the ants out of the dogfood, I'd suggest setting the food in dishes set inside a larger dish of water. I do this sometimes in the cattery when the ants start eating the canned food. Alternatively, just leave the food down for 15 minutes and then take it away. The dogs will learn to eat fast. If you have ant trails forming, sprinkling talcum powder over the trail sometimes disrupts the ants food search.

Here's one of the groggy girl post Ceasar and the 10some. And a few pups up close. And for good measure a shot showing how the puppies entertained themselves while we were at the vets. I don't much like getting 'em to pose in their first days.

My sympathy. Try a kennel zone in WA . . . you get the same thing from three sides. It's hard to keep kennel dogs quiet, especially on holidays when it's crowded. 95% of them are find, but you always seem to get one or two who don't respond to any attempts to quiet them. We exercise dogs throughout daylight hours, and some of them still bark all night -- eg, we have a little JRT with doggy dementia who will not shutup. There are some kennels that do such lovely things as locking dogs OUTSIDE in the exercise yard all night, resulting in fence fighting and other great sounds. On the other hand, I have learned to enjoy and mostly sleep through chorus bark/howling by the greyhounds and the Rotti pack nextdoor. But that's not all night.

Jarrah had 6 males and 4 females. All chocolate. Doing well. Ended up doing a Ceasar on day 63 after frozen semen implantation.

I used to see a basset at dog school - and totally agree with you. The basset pictured in this book is by FAR a better looking dog. The basset? They show six breeds of Basset, most of them rough coats. Where have they all gone?

Looks like you all were right. It's day 59. Jarrah's temperature has dropped to 37 degrees. Unfortunately the air temperature is 39 . . . all six of my dogs, and the whelping box, are now in my bedroom, the only air conditioned room in the house.

One of my vets told me that Salmonella can kill pups with immature immune systems . . . eg, below 4 mo of age. If this is right, don't feed the pup any meat you wouldn't eat yourself. Be very cautious about 'off' chicken. I think necks are better than wings. More meat and smaller bones. I have heard stories about pups getting wing bones stuck . . . but it depends on the pup, how much it chews, etc.. If the pup tends to swallow whole problems are more likely.

another round of Congrads. Tua must be much relieved to get them out of her belly. Looks like a tired and contented mum.

My view if the dog can work, show us It's complicated, and the world changes. It's inspiring to see a kelpie or BC working sheep, or a huskie pulling a sled or cart. But what would you say about a Labbie who aces Guide Dog training and ends out with a full-time job . . . but has a hard mouth, no interest in birds, and doesn't like water? or becomes a sniffer dog, or a truffle hunting dog? or simply acts as the welcoming committee for a boutique winery? Or a bluey who isn't all that good with livestock, but makes a wonderful guard dog? As for the breeds whose work was fighting or bear baiting, or some other awful blood sport, so glad most of them no longer do the work they're bred for. Or hunting runaway slaves (Filho brasilieoro). What of the dogs who were originally cart dogs or spit dogs . . . and the RSPCA saw their work banned in the 19th or early 20th century . .. . I think many would be happy if something like their work was brought back as dog sport. Many dogs like to have a job to do and most people like to see a dog doing a job. As the landscape changes, the function of dogs changes. Much as I admire old-fashioned working dogs, I don't think we need to direct all breeding to creating museum replicas of 19th century working dogs: Especially given that most puppy buyers just want a healthy companion with some-sort-of personality and a certain look. Great if some breeders want to concentrate on the work described in the breed standard . . . but no need to condemn those who take another path. And I think we need to work harder to develop new jobs for dogs to do as their historical functions become obsolete. I am in favour of temperament testing . . . ring presence is not a great sorter for temperament. But I think there's room for tests that go broader than testing for the breed's historical function.

perhaps because it's about as useful as breeding for the broadstick of 'niceness'? Left brain talking here. From running a boarding kennel, affability is a trait I associate with Staffies and Labs. . . . breeds that are far apart on many other scales but are overt in their love of people. Happens that they are the most successful breeds in terms of pedigree dog registrations in Australia over the last decade. So I'm happy to see someone playing with the term.

In my opinion this thread has become a good measure of the understanding of science and science education by the Australian Pedigree Dog owner community. I'd say the rating is about 4 out of 10. I say this as a retired Uni lecturer in the sciences who has overseen a few PhD students . . . and who also happens to breed dogs. Holy Moly!!! Yes there are behavioral tests up the yin yang. My guess is the student can give you an impressive bibliography detailing them and reasoning showing why her test is different and serves a needed function. Her dissertation research proposal shouldn't have been approved without in depth literature review. Affability isn't a selection train that breeders often talk about, and it strikes a chord with me. I'm happy to see someone floating a new behavioural test exploring another dimension. Yes, science comes with biases. Researchers aren't automatrons. They have histories, opinions, etc. that affect the way they shape their hypotheses. And University professors, schools and departments have funding sources, which may affect who they cooperate with and what PhD research they support. The MDBA studies are also conducted by people with biases. BIG DEAL!!!! If you don't like the study you are free not to participate.

I would say, go for a breed that isn't awful and a breeder that has conscientiously selected for good scores over generations. I started out lucky: my foundation bitch was sound . . . of 150+ pups sold to date, I've only had two pups with clinical HD. But all my girls are OFA excellent and most of the dogs I use are as well. Btw., don't go out of the frying pan into the fire: watch for OCD as well as HD. It can be equally as devastating. See http://www.offa.org/elbowstatbreed.html . Also . .. temperament can cause more problems than health. Go for a breed you find likable. In answer to the question of why huskies score so well . . . dogs not long removed from a tough working environment, or selected for running/pulling performance . . . are likely to score well. I'll bet dingos would have good scores if anyone scored them :D .

Another thing you need to consider is whether you would be able to find good homes for pups. I'd recommend talking with other GSD breeders to find out whether there is a surplus or a deficit of GSD pups in your region. If people are having a hard time placing pups, I wouldn't touch breeding with a 10 foot pole.

As others suggest + desex

They are great ideas, going to try some over this week. The chicken stock water block sounds fantastic! All the above, plus, cheap paint rollers. Dogs like the long shape and the fluff, but, unlike stuffed animals, there's no stuffing to pull out.

I wish more breeds did formal temperament screening . . . for many of us, the only temperament testing done is in the show ring. I don't think that the combination of a) not showing aggression or noncompliance; and b) behaviour that shows liking a crowd and showing off in public is a good basis for selecting temperaments that should be passed on. With Labbies, gun work has greatly declined but other tasks, eg, sniffer dog work, guide dog / therapy dog work, has picked up. The breed standard hasn't changed with the function of the breed. Fortunately, many of the attributes desired of a gentleman shooter's retrieving dog -- biddibility, lack of aggressive tendencies, soft mouth, good nose, and being an attentive and loving companion -- carry over well into new roles.

There is a lot of luck in breeding. My first few litters were a breeze. I breed Labbies in WA, so there's a huge market of quality puppy buyers looking for pets. No puppy deaths until litter three. Have never lost a bitch or more than 30% of a litter. After ~150 pups have only had 3 that showed such serious defects that I had to pay out on my puppy guarantee. I've had more people come back looking for a second pup than puppy buyers reporting problems. I probably don't make enough of selling pups to pay ALL the costs of breeding dogs, but still, my girls tend to have large litters, and the revenue from puppy sales is a nice side feature. If the first litter had been very sad in some way, I probably would have thrown in the towel. But, in general, I get so much more positive out of breeding than negative, that it balances out in a way that makes me go on.

I can't help you, as we're in WA. But I'd add that care for diabetes is not difficult for a kennel. . . . at least one that ordinarily feeds twice a day. I'd rather give insulin jabs than try to give tablets to some dogs that hate and avoid them. If you have a kennel that you like, otherwise, have a chat with the manager and see if anyone is willing to learn. Many breeders, and many people with livestock, have given sub cutaneous injections. Most kennels can do special food, particularly if you supply the ingredients.

This has nothing to do with the original post, so my apologies. I don't know how long you have been breeding, but some temperament traits are obvious without any tests, and observation will tell you whether they are hereditary or not. Most experienced breeders do know what traits are hereditary in their own breed, so they are a good source of advice for those who do not know. People who do not understand this, and cannot observe it, imho, should not be breeding. Judge not and yee shall be not judged (Somewhere in the Bible). Evil to them who think evil (some long dead queen of England). I have been breeding for around 10 years. Have had no temperament problems with my own dogs, though some of them are so lovely I'd like to be able to clone their personalities and implant them in some people I wish I didn't know. My concern is the occasional whacko aggressive, nervous, bossy, or otherwise cussed dog who ends up being a pain in the posterior in the boarding kennel -- and who obviously causes distress to an owner who shows every sign of being good dog owner. Example . . . have a sweet German lady who keeps miniature poodles and has for decades. Her present pooch, in contrast to the last three, bites everyone, including her owner, shows affection to no one, and spends all her time in the boarding kennel hiding under the bed. This poor woman has kept the dog for 10 years. Colloquially, I'd say the dog has a screw loose . . . would love to know if it was a genetic defect. . . and how breeders could prevent cursing puppy-buyers with responsibility for such dogs. Could go on with half a dozen other examples. Yes, they might have turned out differently in the hands of the right owner. But some dogs seem to require a lot of effort to keep them from going over the edge, while others seem to be pretty healthy in the mind with owners who do everything 'wrong'.