sandgrubber

OF COURSE IT DOES ! The genetics puzzle gets more complicated when you cross breeds. But heredity doesn't disappear!!!!! One reason I caution people against cross breeds is that they may come from dogs/bitches that would not have passed health criteria within their breed standards. Find out what you can about sire and dam . . . it never hurts.

What to feed and how much is endlessly debatable. Whatever you do, remember that most labs are gutsers and skilled at begging, and feeding too much is a more common problem than feeding too little. Also learn to LOOK AT YOUR DOG. You want to be aware of a rib cage, but you don't want a dog that permanently shows a concave belly and ribs sticking out -- the concentration camp image. I like to see pups looking a bit round (gourdo) after they've eaten, and a bit concave when it's feeding time. As they get older, I try to get them a bit less round. The amount they need is dynamic. In growth spurts they may need more food. But if you concentrate on what the dog looks like, on a week to week basis, you should get the balance right. If it's not extreme and doesn't last for weeks, runny poohs can be ignored.

As a trained academic in the sciences (who has already donned her flame retardant suit): - I would agree to the first three points, as they can be verified by statistics and abundant descriptive evidence. It is hard to dismiss the idea that a breed that is bred to fight has some fighting characteristics or a dog that is bred to protect under extreme conditions will tend toward fiercely protective animals . . .or the data on APBTs in attacks, or the breed description of the Dogo Argentino (or whatever the breed name is . . . I've never seen one, but would not like to meet a mastif-sized dog who is, by breed standard, supposed to display hostility to strangers). - I would dispute the last two points, as they are subjective statements of values that cannot be backed by evidence. Breeds have been adapted to new uses. Labradors, now the most popular breed in English-speaking countries and perhaps elsewhere, are rarely used as gun dogs anymore. Many of them are now sh*t retrievers, some are afraid of water. Lagottos, bred for hunting in Italian swamps, were converted to truffle hunting after the swamps were drained, and they're now being marketed as a non-alergenic house dog. There is no inherent reason why APBTs can't be bred into consistently good pets for an urban/suburban environment. - I would work to show that some breeders are actively breeding to eliminate the heritage of breeding dogs for the fighting ring . . . ie, eliminating the that attributes that make some dogs "dangerous", - I would work to show that breeds classed as dangerous have some wonderful, lovable attributes. AND I would loudly and publicly denounce people who breed dogs for fighting. Regardless of breed. I find it difficult to dismiss the evidence that breeding emphasises some behavioural traits. Aggressive tendencies can be bred up or bred down. So long as there are breeders breeding up the fighting traits, and people buying pups in order to end up with powerful, strong-jawed monsters to promote a macho image there will be support for BSL.

Aren't antibiotics for bacterial infections? Yeast is a fungus AFAIK. AFAIK? meaning? Surolan and Dermotic are the two "antibiotic" drop thingys that I've been given to use on dogs with ear infections. These are a coctail of antibiotics, micocide/fungicide, and steroid drugs if I'm reading the labels right. I think "antibiotics" generally refers to a class of drugs produced by fungi and bacteria and used to fight infections. Mostly bacterial infections. But fungi produce some quite potent fungicides as well, and I think it would be correct to call these antibiotics. The fifth kingdom (fungi) is, after all, biotic. I've often been told that antibiotics don't work on viral infections.

Thanks everybody for thoughtful and constructive comments. I haven't sent the text I wrote at the top of the thread, and think I will delete it and refer to person to your comments. . . and write something into my "advice to puppy buyers" sheet that summarises what you all have said. I have regularly repeated the adage that children should not be allowed to play with puppies or dogs unsupervised . . . but not having been there I haven't developed good instincts about what sort of supervision is required.

I recently got a query from someone who bought a pup (Lucy) from me. The pup is now 4 to 5 months old and the family lives in an semi-remote area where they can expect a long drive before finding a good trainer. They are worried because the pup tends to get excited when playing with kids (ages ranging from 5 to 10 yrs), and this has gotten out of hand, with some breaks of skin. The pup is a Labrador. To my knowledge, no aggressive tendencies in bloodlines . . . Lucy is from her dam's forth litter and this is the first such question I've had, so I presume it's circumstantial. I don't have kids and don't feel well qualified to reply, so have tried to summarize what I can find from various sources. I come up with the following (in italics). I'd appreciate suggestions about how to say it better or direct the owner. (I previously suggested that it was important not to do anything that would seem, from Lucy's perspective, to reward excited behaviour). I'd like to end up with something useful to add to the "instruction" sheet I hand out to puppy buyers. I've been trying to make sense out of a variety of sources with regard to puppy biting, particularly biting kids. Basically . . . retrievers (and other gun dogs) are mouthy dogs and this is a common problem. Correction methods include: a. ignore (when pup gets excited, turn your back and teach kids to do same) b. correct (scold, growl/hiss, or do something to imitate an older dog disciplining dog . . . some sort of fake bite using fingers on mouth/jaw or neck) c. redirect (divert the excitement and get the pup to go for a toy rather than a child) d. treat it as part of a larger problem of control/who is boss (eg use the triangle of temptation to install a sense that people are boss and kids are not litter-mates) e. time out (when dog gets too wild, close it in to the laundry, a crate, or some other confining space) f. muddle through and hope this is a development phase that will correct itself People claim to have had success with all of these methods, and also by combinations of them. There are lots of devils in the details, and the details you have told me may not include the details that are most important in Lucy's case. In general, with dog training, timing is important. Once a behaviour is triggered you don't want to do anything to allow it to escalate. So, regardless if whether it's ignore, correct, redirect, or time out don't let it go very far before you take action. Also, some time may be required for the method to sink in. For example, a time out approach may not get success until it has been used several times. But it may be possible to see that some approach is just escalating the behavior (eg, the pups responds to growling by treating it as part of a game and getting even more wild). If the approach is clearly making things worse, try something else. I suspect the heart of the problem is in the interaction of the kids and the pup, and it may be easier to educate the kids, who do speak English, than the pup, who probably has a hard time understanding what is wanted and does have normal drives to play and interact. A good dog trainer may be able to help you communicate to the pup, but finding a trainer that is "good" for your circumstances may not be easy in a regional location. Sorry I can't give you a clear recipe. Please keep in touch and let me know how you're doing.

I haven't had first hand experience with yeast infections, but lots of dogs coming to the boarding kennel are on ear drops due to yeast infections, and a few pups I've sold got nasty ear infections. Plus a former neighbour had a dog whose ears got so infected that it got into the inner ear and she ended out having to do surgery and a long course of followup treatment. 1. You don't say what antibiotics. Are they ear drops? I find that lots of dogs don't respond to ear drops because people don't put them far enough into the ear and don't put enough in. I've sent a few dogs home from kennels with clear ears whose owners put them through many courses of treatment without success. When I showed them how the vet told me to apply drops they were amazed. 2. If you're unsure of your vet, use your nose. Yeast is smelly. 3. Ear infections can be serious . . . do keep on top of it. Personally, I don't think diet greatly affects yeast infections. There may be cases where it does . . . .

You might tell us where you are . .. someone may recommend a specialist. (I'm in WA and suspect you aren't so I'm no help). I agree with settrlvr. If it is cataracts without associated problems (eg glaucoma, diabetes, etc.) your dog is likely to cope ok. Her vision won't be the same, but it's likely she will still see shapes and have some peripheral vision for some time. Even old dogs who go completely blind manage ok if they have an environment in which they can predict where things are and nothing challenges them too much (a young puppy can be a major challenge). If there's no way to get to a specialist, and your regular vet can rule out other health problems, just be kind to the old girl. If she gets to the point where she can't get on the sofa, give her a bed on the floor. Keep her to a predictable routine. Sight isn't as important to dogs as it is to humans . . .

I've never seen it . .. but I'm told dogs can get good and sick eating blood and bone meal . . . which IS widely available here.

I would NEVER take a 10 week old pup to a dog oval, whether or not there have been parvo signs lately. Parvo can be long lived in the soil. It is carried by dog poohs. A dog oval is the most dangerous place you can take a pup that isn't fully vaccinated. Apart from getting a pup used to a lead and happy walking around your grounds, I wouldn't worry about walks until a pup is four months or so. It sounds like your pup is doing great. There's no need to rush the walks.

As for the Cause . . . "Multiple factors can contribute to the development of pancreatitis. Certain medications, infections; metabolic disorders including hyperlipidemia (high amounts of lipid in the blood) and hypercalcemia (high amounts of calcium in the blood); obesity; and trauma and shock can be associated with the development of pancreatitis. Middle-aged dogs appear to be at increased risk of developing pancreatitis; as a breed, Schnauzers and Yorkshire terriers appear to be more prone to pancreatitis. Nutrition also plays a role. Dogs with diets high in fat, dogs who have recently gotten in to the trash or have been fed table scraps, or dogs who 'steal' or are fed greasy 'people food' seem to have a higher incidence of the disease. In addition, dogs who have previously had pancreatitis or abdominal surgery appear to be more at risk." source: http://www.peteducation.com/article.cfm?c=2+1580&aid=335 for full text

I agree with Erny et al about technique before tools. If you go to the discussion forum at justlabradors.com you'll find a mob of people who prefer prong collars. I just use martindales and flat collars on my Labs and they're all good on the lead. Lots of things work . . . and few tools work if they aren't used correctly. Btw. the problem is walking a dog, not walking a Labrador. You are likely to get this problem on any two year old dog who hasn't previously had good leash training.

If the pancreas isn't working, anything fatty can bring on an attack. So an UNTRIMMED chicken frame, could be a problem. But I wouldn't worry about feeding trimmed chicken frames. They are my dogs main staple, and they have very few health problems.

Frozen is not a problem. Absolutely guarenteed that it will be thawed before it reaches the gut.

My vet always comments on how clean and white my dogs teeth are when they go in for annual check ups. I let them brush their own teeth by giving them bones (mostly raw chicken bones) on a regular basis. I can't see the point of brushing dogs teeth with any product. If you feed them the right stuff their teeth take care of themselves.

If you chase down the references you find that around 150 "suspect" cases of grape/sultana/raisin poisoning were reported in the USA in one year and there were a handful of fatalities (not clear what happened to the others -- could merely be that they puked a few times). I would guess that there are at least 10 million dogs in the USA. So I wouldn't be surprised that careful research will show that the handful of fatalities were a fluke. I'm not about to give raisins/sultanas to my dogs by the kilo, but I remain pretty comfortable with giving them a few grams from time to time. Personally, I'm not giving up peanuts just because some people go into antifalatic shock from eating them. I suspect the dogs/grapes thing is of similar nature.

I would also be inclined to report a threat of that sort to the police. Anonymous threats of violence are not something people should have to live with . . . although in neighborhoods I've lived in the "poison sausage" people strike without warning. What council are you in? If you'd like to try a bark collar, I've got a couple and would be glad to lend one SOR. They're not the kind Erny prefers, that is, they automatically escalate levels. But in my experience, they're pretty effective. Not recommended for more than 8 hrs at a stretch (not sure why, but that was in the instructions). I would not expect interaction with epilepsy. I've read a bit on epilepsy and have never seen anything convincing about external events triggering seizures . . . but better to consult your vet first.

Goldies? Labs? Or at least medium-large dogs with good jaws. If you don't mind a real mess, give them pine cones and banksia nuts. They make a mess but not long splintery pieces. But don't let them chew them up on your bed

Regardless, most people know Grapes are a definite hazard to dogs, so one would assume sultanas are as well, which possibly calls in to question other aspects of Billinghurst's products and suggestions. Actually, until a few years ago no one had ever told me grapes were poisonous to dogs. Aesop's fable of the fox and grapes gives a general sense from early childhood that dog-like animals like grapes (though not sour ones). And I saw dogs snacking on vines in my childhood with no apparent ill effect and no attempt by the owners to keep the dog from eating grapes. I agree, though, Billinghurst presents a lot of ideas with anecdotal evidence only . . . I don't regard him as a reliable veterinary reference.

Another approach to digging is to direct it . . . "good hole" . .. "bad hole". Designate a digging place that won't look too awful, eg under a bush (mine have a great hole under the bouganvillia), praise for digging there, redirection or mild correction when digging elsewhere. Digging is natural for dogs, but there's no need to dig everywhere. Note, many dogs dig to find a cool place to lie. Make sure to locate the "good hole" in a place that satisfies this . . . preferably a shady location that gets a little moisture.

Everybody talks about loose lead. Is that a figure of speech, indicating no pull, or is it really best for leads to be loose -- that is, to sag in the middle or drag on the ground? I walk my four together on 1.8 m leads. My preference, which they mostly observe, is for the leash to be taught without pulling. I guess I got into this with tracking, where a taught lead allows better communication with the dog. If the leads really go slack, I have a lot more trouble with feet getting tangled and I feel that I have less control. One, in particular, occasionally pulls for a meter or two when there's a smelly treat by the side of the road (eg kitty cruncher), but I correct her with the lead when this happens . . . she doesn't like correction and mostly resists the urge. Is there something wrong with taught leads?

When I first read Billinghurst, I took a lot of things as true and did feed my dogs both raisins and sultanas, not in huge quantities, but more than a few. No sign of poison. A friend of mine did the same. Must be that some dogs are strongly affected and others not.

Antibiotics can help with secondary bacterial infections, but are not helpful for kennel cough itself. Some strains of KC are very persistent, some pass quickly . . . rather like flu. It is worth asking the boarding kennel owner if KC was around when the dogs were in . .. if it was I'd say KC is likely . . . the kennel owner may be able to tell you something about the strain. If not, I'd be more inclined to look for other disease. Btw. try not to put the kennel person on the defensive . . . they get paranoid that someone will try and collect from them if dogs get KC. Make it clear that you're not on a witch hunt and you're likely to get honest information. As others have mentioned, it's important to rule out heartworm and other conditions (heart disease) that lead to coughing. You might say where you are in and ask for recommendations for veterinarian.

In my book the brief repeated introductory shot hardly counts . . . it's just a quick atmosphere shot with nothing to show that it's actually a walk or part of the daily routine of a well adjusted dog. For all I can tell, it's something his PR crew set up and has nothing to do with daily life.his dogs' daily existences. edited to correct punctuation

I'm willing to admit that there may have been a dog somewhere who had trouble with retaining chicken bone. But I'll bet there have been a lot more dogs who have ended out with stinking mouths and rotten teeth and a bundle of other problems because they are never fed anything that works their teeth. Chicken frames are popular with people who own and have owned lots of dogs because they are a great food, widely available for a small price, and most dogs thrive on them.