sandgrubber

In my experience (I lived outside Leipzig with a dog for a couple year) Germany is extremely dog friendly . . . not so child friendly. Many Germans identify themselves as 'tierleib' -- animal lovers. Willem's right. This article is 16 years old. BSL is still in force. The Germans have tended to avoid the difficulty of identifying pit bulls by banning them all: SBT, AmStaff, APBT and BT. There are undercurrents in German culture that wouldn't be a good mix with fighting breeds. Maybe that's why the legislation is accepted, or maybe it's some sort of determination not to import problems. Don't expect to see bans on the German breeds. Rottis, GSD's etc. are part of the social fabric.

My vet recommends douching the ear with a mixture of one part water, one part vinegar, and one point rubbing alcohol. Take a squeeze bottle like those sold for mustard and ketsup and really flood the ear. Message the ear. Let the dog shake it out. Then gently swab the outer ear gunk with a cotton wad. Yeast does not tolerate low pH, hence the vinegar. Rubbing alcohol has a drying effect. Water keeps it from being too strong and burning. Note, similar mixtures have long been used for kids with 'swimmer's ear'. If the infection is more complicated, your vet can probably give you an antibiotic ointment to apply after cleaning. Vinegar won't kill bacteria, only yeast. So if bacterial infection has followed yeast, you may need antibiotics.

Kudos to the Huff. Good article. Sad case . . . but good to point out that BSL is on the wane in the US for good reason.

Tired of it or not, emphasis on desexing and subsidized desexing works. In most of the US (apart from the South) it is getting hard to find dogs for adoption, that is unless you want a bull breed cross. Strays are being imported from Mexico and the US South to fill the need for adoptable shelter dogs. Private 'shelters' cherry pick dogs that are turned in for adoption, and their rates of rehoming are very high -- sometimes their prices are pretty high as well. In large part this is due to heavy emphasis on desexing and widespread availability and advertisement of free or heavily subsidized spay/neuter clinics. Our local clinic charges $US60 for a dog or bitch, regardless of your income. For low income people, it's free. They also have free clinics to spay and neuter feral cats.

I LOVE the diversity in the Labrador breed. The notion of splitting, IMO, is horrid and absolutely the wrong direction to go. When you have closed the stud books, you need to keep the breeding pool as large as possible. Splitting backs you into a corner. From the time of the breed's origin, there has been a strong tradition of aiming for dual purpose dogs, meaning field/sport and show. A century ago, Countess Lorna Howe promoted the dual purpose Labrador . . . and many many breeders still aim for Labs that are capable of hunting or other useful activity, but still do well in conformation shows. Many winning show dogs have been, and still are, worked as gun dogs. Some of the leading breeders in Australia and New Zealand fall in line with this tradition. The fact that some people are only interested in show or sport . . . or guide dogs or sniffer dogs . .. doesn't bother me at all. If you want a dog that excels in the hunt and has very high drive . . . there are breeders who can supply them. And if a breeder who has mostly done show/pet dogs decides they want to up the drive in their dogs, eg., to have a go at agility, there are bloodlines they can look to. Guide Dogs does sometimes use show lines rather than their own dogs. Blackboy Kennels in WA has a long association with Guide Dogs, and I know some Lab breeders in the Eastern States have also provided both puppies and stud services.

IMO people are far too judgmental. If ethical breeders don't breed to meet demand, someone else will. In the USA we're down to <7% of all puppies born being registered by the AKC. It's estimated that 300,000 puppies and dogs are imported each year to meet demand. Most imports are commercially imported, and are not pedigree dogs. Shelters have a surplus of breeds/types that people don't want. But there are not enough dogs to meet demand for the sort of dogs people do want.

While breeders don't directly breed to meet demand, it's hard to ignore it completely. When the price per puppy rises above $1500 and waiting lists are long and include a good many well-qualified buyers, it's tempting to have another litter. If you had trouble placing the last litter with decent homes, it's much more difficult to justify another litter.

It's hopeless at my house. The dogs have gotten me desensitized. The bad: "love me, love my dog" becomes a somewhat higher hurdle.

Anyone here on DOL calling for the banning of Labradors? ricey Some Labradors do bite. Most Labrador puppies bite a lot! But the severity of Lab bites is, on average, less than that of many other breeds. Look at the dog fatality statistics or hospital admission statistics, rotten as their quality is: you will see that Labs are not heavily represented, despite being the most common dog breed in the US. Pit bull numbers aren't that high in Colorado in part due to BSL. If they weren't banned in Denver, they might well have come in first. And if you look at the percent of the total dog breed population that has inflicted serious injury, who knows what breed will come out as #1. Could be some relatively rare guardian breed. I am not for banning pitties. They are the most common dog breed where I now live. I don't see pits as any more dangerous than Staffies. Biggest problem is the huge number of pits that end up in shelters and get put to sleep. The hardest of the hard questions is how do you make everyone (98% isn't good enough) be responsible in caring for their dogs. The 'Calgary Model' is hard to sustain, much less export.

hmm tried to fix link but it's stubborn.

I presume you don't want ticks from outside Australia . . . and that deterioration in shipping may impede research if the transport time is several days?

Breed is relevant, though dogs are not always true to breed stereotype. I've had a lot of Labs. They run free inside and out. The closest thing to a fight I've seen is play fighting. With my present three, the puppy (2 yrs) often gets rolled, with the older dogs standing over her. But everyone wags and no one gets hurt. And they get up and do it all over again. I once read a sled-dog book where the author said his dogs enjoyed fighting. Hence he had to keep them staked. That left me wondering if play fighting was a behavioral relic. Also left me wondering whether some dog fights were a dog's version of recreation. Chase, dig, fight . . . all things dogs 'like' to do.

Everyone will tell you to select for health . . . I take that for granted, but it's better to have a dog that you truly love and gets arthritis at 8 yrs than a dog you wish was dead and lives to 16 years . . . so do pay attention to temperament. Furthermore, don't be too wow'ed by health measures. A hip score of 5:7 on one or both of the parents looks kind of bad, but is rarely going to lead to problems, and may just be a stupid manifestation of how the dog was positioned when X-rays were done. Don't sacrifice other desired traits to get the 0:0 hips, 0:0 elbows. I would worry if you see 12:15 hips or 2:2 or 3:1 elbows . . . but no one advertizes those. Also, if you're after a pet, it doesn't matter at all if the sire or dam is a carrier (or even affected) for PRA or EIC .. . so long as the other parent is clear there is no way your pup will be affected. As for EIC, even if your pup IS affected. there's a good chance that you will never notice it. Many excellent dogs proved to be EIC affected when they first worked out the genetic test . . . One more thing . . . it's good to work with a breeder who has some skill in temperament testing. Some litters have a mix of higher drive and lower drive pups. If the breeder is capable of judging which is which and wants to select the pup for you (probably best done at around 8 wks) that's a positive. Best to ask how they do the selection. We select the best pup for you' can be a shady dodge to make sure all the pups get homed at asking price, regardless of temperament problems. Bottom line here is (1) define what your are looking: both temperament and conformation (2) question the breeder to find out how their bloodlines match up to what you want.

GIven that I don't have a gun, and don't hunt, the official 'gundog' and 'retriever' categories don't matter much at all. Or if you wish to push it back further, the proto-Labradors, the St John's dogs, were bred for multipurpose work, but especially catching fish that had escaped from a barbless hook line in very cold ocean waters. This matters to perhaps 0.001% of Labrador owners. I have owned Labs who didn't retrieve and didn't much like water . . . something of a surprise but not a major concern. As I understand the breed's evolution, easy rapport with people (gentleman's companion to the landed gentry of late 19th century/early20th century UK), good with other dogs, and capable of learning are extremely important . . . and essential in permitting the Lab to become the preferred guide dog/assistance dog, and a valuable breed for police work where attack/threat attributes are not desired...not to mention the most popular breed in the English speaking world (and quite popular elsewhere).

No Labrador should have blue eyes - not even the chocolates. I think a communication problem here. Lab puppies often have beautiful blue-almost-purple eyes . . . they turn brown later. ASK THE BREEDER ABOUT TEMPERAMENT. Both sire and dam. All Lab breeders say their dogs have 'great temperament' . . . so ask them what is great about their dogs' temperament -- without telling them what sort of temperament you are looking for (lots of people will tell you what you want to hear, maybe not deliberately, so don't let them know what you want to hear). When they tell you their dogs are smart, ask them for examples. Labs range from extremely mellow to somewhat maniacal. In part this is in the upbringing, but some of it seems to be genetic. Some breeders select for the more active dogs, other like the couch potatoes. I have met a few Labs who were highly protective and would bite intruders . . . many are friendly to a fault if you don't like forever eager greetings. I personally love the breed because of the intuitive grasp of human emotions and needs . . . as Stressmagnet describes. This trait is much stronger in some lines than others. If this is what you're looking for, ask what the dogs have picked up without being trained. You might also want to ask about time to maturity. I love Lab pups, but a lot of people have trouble dealing with their antics and mouthyness. It's good to know whether they're going to start to settle at 18 months, or whether it's likely to be 3 years. I find this varies quite a bit in different lines.

Horrid story. But AMAZING! At least in the two articles I read, no one mentioned breed!!!! They just showed the photo and let the reader make their own assessment!

I know vets aren't rolling in cash, and I can't remember meeting any vet who didn't love animals. Yes, the dichotomy between young and old vets is a gross simplification. There are complaints/situations where newer protocols have much better results than older protocols. There are old vets who don't read the literature; there are young vets who barely scraped through in vet school. There are both young and old vets who are enthusiastic about treatments for which there is very little scientific evidence. But it's not conspiracy theory to say that in a market with a few suppliers who note one another's action and many, independent buyers, price will not be determined by competition but by producer's calculation of what the market will bare. You learn that in Economics 101. Because people are willing to pay a lot to keep their pets comfortable, prices are high. Nor is it conspiracy theory to say that pet medicines are a high-profit segment of the pharmaceutical industry; or that the pharmaceutical industry takes an interest in what is taught in vet schools, and spends a fair amount to try and influence what and how much vets prescribe. Marketing in a big part of the pharma budget.

I didn't know that was the cause of tape worms so I just did some googling. Apparently it's caused by swallowing an infected flea, which means your dog could do that while they're out and about and don't have to have fleas themselves, and the Advocate won't stop that from happening. I'm not sure what the likelihood is of that though so am contemplating stopping the all wormer unless there's some kind of indication that my dog has worms, as I'd rather not give him stuff like that unnecessarily There are no simple recipes . . . what's best/cheapest depends on your area, what's around, and how your dog responds to various parasite treatments. Bottom line is make sure to control/avoid heartworm and/or paralysis ticks if they're in your area, cause they can kill your dog. Everything else, watch and adjust treatments to take care of problems as they occur. A lot of people just do a general wormer every quarter. I can't see giving it monthly, as in HeartGuard Plus. Worms are gross and you don't want your dog to build up a large burden of worms. But a few worms are no big deal. Note general wormers often don't work for tapeworm. It requires a different, and more expensive, chemical (fenbendaxole). But tapeworm, isn't all that common, and you'll notice white rice-grain like things in your dog's poop if they have it. Usually people don't treat for tapeworm until they see evidence it's there. I find the best way to check for fleas is to get a flea comb and run it through the dog's coat. Flea treatments can be tricky. All flea treatments are essentially poisons that are not supposed to affect dogs. But some of them affect some dogs . . .eg., cause seizures. In some places fleas have become resistant to some flea meds, eg., Frontline. Heartworm: If your dog is ok with Ivermectin (many herding dogs are not . . . there's a genetic test available if you're in doubt), the 1% livestock formulations are dirt cheap. You can find dosage recommendations all over the internet; some of them recommend higher dosages than others. The stuff is so cheap that I can see no point of going to 6 mo. applications. I give my girls an egg with Ivermectin injected into the yolk once a month. One $40 bottle has is going on two years for three Labradors. The only trick is measurement . . . the required doses are generally a fraction of a ml (eg, small insulin syringe). It's very easy to use too much. Ticks are deadly if you're in a paralysis tick area, otherwise just obnoxious. If you do live in a paralysis tick area you should read up on the problem and keep your dog medicated (I don't, and have forgotten which treatments are recommended). Otherwise . . . use tick preventatives if you find a lot of ticks. I live in an area that is awful for both fleas and ticks, and have dogs that don't tolerate some flea meds. I find Bravecto works great for both. It isn't cheap, but it works where other meds have failed, and giving one tablet every three months is convenient.

Given the often unfortunate tendency for trends to spread from the US to Oz, I don't think this stuff should be ignored. In the years I spent in Oz I went to a lot of vets. The older ones tended to stick to pretty basic meds and were ok with home remedy stuff like vinegar for yeasty ears . . . the younger ones seem to be more influenced by big pharma, and would recommend Epi-Otic rather than the home-made version. Some of the veterinary chain practices seem to have heeded advice from practice managers to sell as many products as possible, thus increasing profits. Display counters with everything from (overpriced) flea and tick meds, to sequined collars. Also important to keep in touch with what is being taught in vet schools, and how much influence big pharma has on the curriculum.

I'm not sure whether a dead snake would work at all. I did tracker work for a few years. People I worked with said that dogs got VERY confused by suicides: they follow the track up to near the body and then go wandering trying to figure out where the scent trail went. Dead people don't smell the same as living ones. I would guess the same is true of snakes.

NOT a reasonable fee. It's essentially a fee for seeking an alternative diagnosis, or for changing practices. Highly anti-competitive. If it isn't banned by law, it should be! If the charge were $5 for the five to 10 minutes it takes the staff to pull files and email copies, it would be reasonable. But $40 is far above actual costs.

Was checking up on economics of the pet meds industry. Some may find this article interesting http://www.indystar.com/story/news/investigations/2014/12/18/drug-companies-loosen-purse-strings-to-woo-vets/20492301/ A clip from the first few paragraphs of the article For five days, the action never stopped at the McCormick Place convention center, as more than 9,000 veterinarians and technicians flocked to see the latest medicines and attend clinical workshops organized by the American Veterinary Medical Association. Around the show floor, the world's biggest drugmakers had set up exhibits two stories tall, with enough flashing lights and giant twirling logos to resemble a Detroit car show. The vets, the nation's last line of defense against unsafe drugs getting to animals, were receiving a blizzard of meals, books, electronic gadgets and speaking fees from drugmakers. The convention revealed just one of the many ways corporate money influences pet health care — from research to treatment to sales — threatening the objectivity of those prescribing drugs to your dog or cat.

Drug prices are mostly set by the drug company's calculation of what people are willing to pay. The most spectacular example of this is Ivermectin and pyrantel paomate . . . the two active ingredients in HeartGuard Plus. If I buy Ivermectin for cattle, a dose sufficient for a dog costs under 50 cents. Pyrantel is equally inexpensive when you buy the large bottle as sold for treating human babies for pinworm. For most pet meds, the active ingredient costs far less than the marketing and packaging. So it makes sense that price has little relationship to the quantity of meds. As for research costs . . . most pet meds were developed for human or livestock applications. The main research costs are a set of trials to establish safety and effectiveness, and some marketing research.

thesciencedog blog recently put up a post describing studies of trachea sold as dog treats. The studies show that thyroid tissue tends to come along with the trachea, and the result can cause hyperthyroidism. Chicken necks came up in the discussion . . . apparently there's some risk of getting excessive thyroxine from feeding them as well. https://thesciencedog.wordpress.com/2015/10/29/got-gullet/ Quoting from near the end of the article: "The knowledge that the presence of animal thyroid tissue in foods can cause hyperthyroidism is not new information. Outbreaks of diet-induced hyperthyroidism in people are well-documented and are the reason that “gullet trimming” as a source of ground beef was outlawed in the 1980’s. Yet, these tissues are still allowed in the foods that we feed to our companion animals. Why is this?"