sandgrubber

I disagree, no offence to your breeder/vet, but I am yet to meet a vet who knows anything more than the basics of dog nutrition, I'm sure they exist, but they certainly aren't the norm. You cannot possibly compare the GI tract of a canine with that of a human, there is no similarity at all. The teeth, the saliva, the time food remains in the stomach, the strength of the stomach acids and the actual length of the intestines are all totally different, a dog has a carnivore's digestive system which is designed to deal with flesh and bones. That's not to say that they cannot deal with any carbohydrate, but they do have problems processing large amounts which is why cheap dry foods that are full of fillers and have a high cereal content will produce large amounts of poo and occasionally diarrhoea in some dogs. You will also have to feed twice as much as the nutrition derived from the grain content of the food is minimal. A dog is not designed to process carbohydrate whereas we humans deal with starches very well and diets containing large amounts of fibre (roughage) are actually beneficial, in fact humans who consume minimal amounts of fibre are actually predisposing themselves to a variety of diseases including cancer of the bowel. Fur, feathers and other 'rubbish' are still parts of an animal and are not carbohydrate, I doubt that you will ever see a wild dog grazing in a wheat field or trying to raid a silo. If the OP wishes to feed a dry food as the basis of her dog's diet then I would recommend Eagle Pack Holistic or Nutro, personally I have never found an Australian product that gives the same results as either of the aforementioned products. 1. Dogs are 'designed' (I would prefer to say, 'evolved') to scavange. I didn't say they did well on carbohydrates. My dogs get fat on carbos . . . and on food with too high of fat content (how odd, so do I ). Nor did I say that a human gut would be happy with bones, fur, feathers, herbivore droppings, and other things an omnivore/scavenger canine is happy to eat. Some dogs have been bred to specifications well outside the evolved generic Canis design, and I would not assume that all breeds have the same nutritional requirements. 2. I would be grateful for any evidence from peer reviewed literature saying that a diet that reduces foecal volume is better for a dog. There was a time that human dieticians promoted digestable foods and thought roughage had no nutritional value. Now, after millions of dollars of studies of a sort that are rarely conducted on dogs they tell us to eat fibre cause it's good for the gut and the heart. I am not saying dogs should eat bran . . . although the enthusiasm with which mine go for horse manure suggest to me that undigestable plant matter may be a natural thing for them to eat. It seems plausable that some meat byproducts are very good for the dog, though not highly digestable. But, so far as I can find, the research as not been done and we cannot say whether undigestable matter is good or not good or neutral for a dog. It does mean more pooh to pick up. And more food ingested. But if the price of the 'highly digestable' is three times that of the other food, the 'savings' effect of super premium is lost. 3. I do know that vets make a bundle selling high end dogfood. . . and that vet surgeries themselves consider the cost of picking up dog pooh large in comparison to the cost of feeding dogs. I do know that price of super premium brands reflects additional middlemen and import/export + advertising. I would guess that more than half the price difference between domestic brands and super premiums is due to things that do absolutely nothing for the dog. I wish some Ozzie company would spend a few bob more per kg to make a super premium food . . . but if they did, I'll bet a lot of people would still by the imports due to image factors. 4. If you intelligently fill out a mid-range food with a high protein source and some supplements, you end out with something that is VERY similar in ingredients to a super-premium food.

I, personally, have a political/economic objection to importing dry dogfood when Australia produces so much meat and meat prices are so low here. Thus I generally settle for a mid-price range domestic dogfood and supplement with high quality chicken frames, mince, eggs, carrots, cabbage, and a fish-based multi-nutrient/trace mineral supplement. Actually, I do the reverse. I feed meat etc. and supplement with dry food. But then, I'm feeding 10 to 50 dogs, so price is a concern. My local vet (who was a breeder before she became a vet) says that the 'digestability' arguement doesn't hold water. Imagine basing your own diet on minimising the amount you deficate ;) . Roughage is part of a natural diet. Wild dogs undoubetedly eat bits of fur, feathers, and other 'rubbish' . . . which just passes through. I'd rather just get a bigger pooper scooper ;) . Because Australia is an old continent and trace mineral deficiencies are ubiquitous, I think that trace mineral supplementation is a good idea. As a scientist I object to any product being marketed as "Science" . In my book that's a joke I don't want to be the butt of ;) . Btw, if you want to read a label that looks really awful, try reading the Eukanuba Veterinary Weight Loss diet bag. If I remember correctly, First ingredient is corn. Second is sorghum. Then there's some chicken by-product.

What is dirt for if not for digging in :D ? I run a boarding kennel and find that concrete -- everywhere -- is the most successful way to stop digging. Grid mesh over specific areas will keep them from digging at that area, but they generally just go to the edge of the grid mesh and commence digging. For my own dogs, I've moved into a bunk bed. I get the [sand free] top bunk and they are free to demolish the lower bunk.

Good to hear that 'ignore' has won out again. I am an early riser (late for me is 6 am) and my dogs all learn to rise early. But when my [late riser] mother was alive and used to dog sit for me, it was amazing how well and how rapidly the dogs learned that 'get up and cuddle time' was more like 9 am.

Ditto. Fidos (I mostly use the 'herbal') has a pleasant and very long lasting smell. May last a week. And it's a good shampoo as well.

Ditto the aforesaid suggestions about reading labels, asking questions, and being wary of overmedication. My more down to earth vet tells me that heartworm treatments (I do the injection, so I can't say for certain about the tabs) give six months of retrospective treatment . . . thus you can get away with doing nothing until they are six months old. She recommends starting heartworm meds at four months (tablets, that is). Many vets are pricey. I don't find much correlation between the price and the quality of service -- indeed, the cheapest vet is often the one who gives best medical care -- though it may not include the friendliest bedside manner of the poshest waiting room. Lots of vets overmedicate and cheerfully onsell to customers all the things the drug and dogfood company salesmen bring by their door. You may want to do a little shopping around.

I would guess that up until 100 years ago, all dogs had fleas. They are not fatal, though they may cause some nasty skin problems. Your vet may or may not be right . . . but it's a case where you can afford to experiment if you don't like the vet solution. Some vets err strongly on the side of caution . . . or perhaps the meds companies have been very good in teaching people to sell their products . . . or perhaps some people are so upset about the slightest flea problem that vets feel a need to use overkill every time.

Thanks everybody for giving another kick at the dry dogfood 'dead horse'. Damn! I was hoping for a simple answer I would consider 6 mo (as used by AAFCO) a long trial if I was paying for it, but as a breeder . . . or for puppy buyers as a pet owner, I don't consider it very long. Also it would be interesting to know what they consider 'signs of nutrition related diseases'. A dry coat is not a disease, nor is high volume of foecal matter. So presumably the things people find 'bad' about SC could pass muster in such trials. I guess in the long run it comes down to reading as much as you can, evaluating, and making decisions based on your experience plus outside information. Which puts me back where I began . . . thinking that a lower price dogfood used as a supplement to fresh meats and a few veg's is a pretty good diet.

Not really. Australian dog foods get AAFCO certified too, which is the standard the site talks about rather than American laws. SuperCoat included. True for foods manufactured here, not so for the imported products. Sorry, I'm not good at quotes within quotes. I'm looking at bags from SuperCoat and CopRice. Neither says it is AAFCO certified. Rather, they say "formulated to meet AAFCO nutritional standards". I can't see that this means they are labelled according to AAFCO rules. Not to be cynical, but I've noticed some companies treat standards with lip service and a wink. Previous discussion of this subject at: http://forums.dogzonline.com.au/lofiversio...php/t27075.html seems to have come to the conclusion that PFIAA was the relevant body in Australia. The PFIAA code of conduct: http://www.pfiaa.com.au/default.asp?d=67698&p=54227 Says nothing about labelling, and nothing about enforcement. I suspect this boils down to voluntary compliance.

Jeez, that's a great way to ensure that you're spending more on import fees and middle men (or women) than on dogfood ! Isn't there a descent locally made dogfood

I like the Dog Food Project site -- good basic science -- but am not confident about applying US information in Australia. Two problems. 1. Different Labelling Laws. Can anyone point to a description of Australian labelling laws as applied to pet foods? For example, if US laws applied here, I don't think SuperCoat would advertise their product as 'with real beef' or 'with real chicken' -- doing so would imply that meat was a small fraction and they go out of their way to project the image that it's the main ingredient. It would be particularly useful to know how water is counted as an ingredient . . . as the Dogfood Project people point out, meat tends to be 80% water, so having meat as a first ingredient on the label doesn't prove there's a lot of meat in the stuff. 2. Different biogeochemistry. Australia is an old continent that is highly deficient in trace minerals. Trace mineral deficiencies in introduced livestock species are widespread. On the other hand North America is a very young continent (most of the US and Canada is freshly weathered since the last glaciation) and trace mineral deficiencies are almost unknown. I think we have to pay more attention to trace minerals than Norte Americanos.

I'm forever looking for a better dry food that doesn't cost a bundle. I notice people often say 'read the label' -- which I always do. But I find labels confusing. Eg, I recently bought a bag of ProPlan Puppy -- which gets good recommendations -- and was horrified to read that it is 1.5% salt !!!! In my book that's the junk food range (and dogs love it). I notice everyone dumping on SuperCoat, but its ingredients look fine to me. I don't mind if pooh volume is large. It doesn't take me any longer to scrape up a big one than a little one . Ok 22% protein isn't heaps, but I can up this by feeding mince(~$3/kg) and chicken frames (~$.70/kg). The dogs like fresh stuff better than super premium ($7/kg and up). In playing around with supplements I've found that selenium and zinc appear to be important for coat. But for trace minerals, the quantities and form (eg digestability) must matter and you can't get them off a label. Simpler to forget them in the dry food and use a supplement you trust. Also 'by products' seem to be a no-no in many people's books, but blood and bone are by-products, and I would think they provide good nutrition, particularly if they aren't cooked to death. Indeed, I would consider the chicken carcasses I feed so freely to be 'meat by products'. I don't like the fatty by products -- but if the fat content is specified that's taken care of. So . . . For those people who advise reading the label . . . what do you look for?

I'm afraid this is normal behaviour, and will continue into adulthood. I run a boarding kennel. The hair yield from Goldies is quite high. :p

Apart from onions, raw potatoes, and corn on the cob (off the cob is fine, the cob itself is DANGEROUS) I'd say find something cheap, and if the dog likes it, feed him lots. I buy horse carrots in a 20 kg bag for five or six bucks. My six dogs go through 10 kg a week. Once upon a time I was a good girl and put it through a juicer and fed them the pulp as specified in the BARF diet. But the juicer broke down. Now I just coarsely chop the carrots, throw them on the floor, and they gobble them up. Pups think this is great and have a great time chasing the orange disks as they roll across the floor. You can tell from the poohs that they don't digest the whole thing, or even most of it, but WTH, they enjoy eating it, it doesn't make them fat, it probably cleans out their intestines, and they probably digest some of it. Mine also love cabbage, cauliflower, apples, broccoli stems, asparagus ends, green peppers, . . . .but they're Labradors (notorious gutsers). Cooked meat is not harmful. Cooked bone is a no-no. Meat without bone may result in to much protein and not enough calcium. Raw chicken mince is worth avoiding if you don't know its history. Chicken guts, or poorly stored chicken, may harbour salmonella. My vet says that by four months they can generally handle the nasties that may appear in raw chicken.

Hi. I breed Labradors and run a boarding kennel (in which I often mix unrelated dogs for play). Interesting question. I would predict that both the JRT and your future pup would have a good time but SUPERVISION is ESSENTIAL in the beginning and you MUST have a strategy in mind for what to do if the outcome isn't good. . . Labbies (and I think goldies) are good at being gentle and attuning their behaviour to that of other dogs; JRT's are spirited and playful, and don't seem to know they're small. The mode of play is quite different for the two breeds, but pups are usually pretty good at accommodating one another. I would be more worried about having a dog as a renter . . . if you don't have a long term lease and if things in your area aren't good for getting a rental with a dog you may be setting up for trouble. Two pups can wreck havoc on a back yard!!!!!

Training wasn't effective. Watch her. Take her out, or call her out, when she's about to do it. Praise and reward her when she does it outside. It WILL eventually stick. Sometimes you have to persist. Sometimes puppies backslide. Mostly, you'll never know why because it's hard to get inside a dog's head. Forget interpretation. Just plug on with positive reinforcement and you'll get there

I have tried the full barf a couple of times, but I stuff it up by "overfeeding" him I feed a chicken-frame based BARF-type diet to Labs. The trick to weight control, in my book, is a HEAVY meat clever and a good cutting board. Also, not buying raw fatty bones (eg, my local supply of brisket bones is so fatty I can't use them, likewise most of the lamb flaps I've come across). Cut off fatty bits (not hard with chicken frames), and keep cutting the portions down until the dog begins loosing weight. Note that the bum end of the carcass is much fattier than the neck end, so if you've got a Jack Sprat ('could eat no fat, his wife could eat no lean') situation, give the thin one the bum end. Labs vary greatly in requirements. I have one girl who gains weight on one chicken a day; other girls who require one and a half. I also give the dogs coarsely chopped carrots as fill / fibre -- roughly three carrots a day per dog (I buy horse carrots in a 20 kg bag). They love them but don't digest them much (I can always spot the poohs from my dogs by the orange lumps in them).

I've skimmed all the posts and been surprised that no one has mentioned what my vet said was most important . . . getting air to the affected area. I had a lot of trouble with hot spots before I settled on a diet that seems to prevent them. Each time the vet SHAVED the area around the hotspot and gave me something to dry out the affected area. I don't think it matters a whole lot what you use to dry it out, so long as it isn't toxic or painful for the dog. Something that disinfects -- eg, containing chlorohexadine or peroxide -- is also useful. Harsh soaps work too. The last few times I had to cope with hot spots I clipped around the area with scissors (Labrador people don't generally have clippers) and used whatever I had around to dry the area out. Everything seems to work.

I breed labbies. On the size issue, all I can say is 'patience'. 19 kg isn't that light for six months, so I would guess that she's got some bone, which is good. And while I can't condone the breeder putting you off, 6 months is an awful age to evaluate. The imported dog I'm now hoping will come out as a good stud dog started growing rapidly in the bum at that age and his front legs didn't catch up until nine or ten months -- with the result that he looked awful. He's looking pretty good at 10 months. For all I can tell, the jury is out on the food question, apart from 'don't supplement calcium' and 'don't overfeed'. Everyone has opinions and experiences, but they point in many different directions. Big can be worse than small. The most fantastic looking litter I have had (bitch on breeder's contract, the owner feeds a strict BARF diet) filled out beautifully in their first nine months, all large and all well proportioned. Three of them have been hip/elbow scored. One had 3:3 elbows and at two and a half is limping, one had a hip that was so bad that the owner didn't get scoring done (both were castrated), and one had 1:1 hips but 0:2 (2 mm) elbows . . . she does beautifully in the show ring. Their lines have elbow problems (ie, scores of 2 on one side) here and there, but none of the immediate ancestors had problematic. The same bitch was put to a different dog and most of the pups came out slight (fine bone) and some of them short as well. None made it to breeding quality. If I were the breeder, the best way to approach me on this would be to ask for shift to main register so you can show, while offering to sign a Non-Breeding Contract that says you cannot breed for your bitch until such time as the breeder agrees she is of breeding quality. If you do well in shows, the breeder should come around in time and -- if you want to -- agree to let you breed from her. Most of us are proud to have winners out under our prefixes. Others may not agree, but I think it would be better if Limited Register allowed showing up to one year of age . . . that would give everyone a chance to get pups evaluated via the showring, and give breeders a better basis for deciding which pups to promote from Limited to Main.