sandgrubber

To Slim Down, Procter & Gamble Sells Most of Its Pet Food Brands to Mars Mr. Lafley set about addressing Mr. Ackman's criticisms on Wednesday, agreeing to sell most of Procter & Gamble's pet foods brands — including Iams and Eukanuba — to Mars, best known as a candy maker, for $2.9 billion in cash.Since A. G. Lafley returned last year for a second stint as chief executive of Procter & Gamble, investors have been waiting for him to make a big move. blah blah blah ... streamlining the company ... Another possible deal for Procter & Gamble could be the sale of the remainder of its pet food business. The company said it would sell the remaining 20 percent of that unit to Mars or another buyer, which could fetch $700 million. ... Mars, one of the largest private companies in the country, is best known as a confectioner, the maker of M&M's, Snickers and Twix. But the company also has a robust business selling food for cats and dogs. This is the biggest purchase for Mars since its $23 billion acquisition of the chewing gum company Wrigley in 2008. Mars has annual net sales of about $33 billion. Its stable of pet food brands includes Whiskas cat food and the Pedigree and Royal Canin pet food lines. If approved, the deal will give Mars 20 percent of the United States market for cat and dog food combined, up from its current 13 percent. But it will still be well behind Nestlé, which has 50 percent of the market with its popular Purina brands. In dog food alone, the deal will make Mars somewhat stronger, giving it control of 28 percent of the country's dog food market, up from 19 percent. Source: http://dealbook.nyti...type=blogs&_r=1 Spotted on Terrierman blog.

How about educating themselves to know that males in the wild kill the young. They could have separated them. Unfortunately, zoos function as public entertainment and the public loves baby animals. This sets up many ethical problems. I'm sure they know that males will kill young. But they would probably have to euth the young in any case if they don't have the facilities to care for them. For all we know, the bears were an unwanted gift from Putin. To turn them down would have been an insult . . .

Glad you've worked it through. They sound like typical Labradors . . . super keen on food, but not prone to aggression.

Quoting from the article: 'Zoos have too many captive bears and it is almost impossible to send them somewhere. Surplus bears have to be euthanised, and it is better to do that at a very young age when the mortality in nature is also the highest.'

Cutting tempered glass and engineering the result to get it back to original strength would be prohibitively expensive. I don't think anyone does it. Go for a click in . .. or build one if you're handy.

I feed my three labs together. I fill all three bowls at the same time and set them down simultaneously. The puppy finishes last. I've never had any trouble with growling or stealing, although I think it would be less peaceful if they were feed sequentially rather than simultaneously. You do not want the pup finish first and come over to the older dog to see if there's anything to be had from the other bowl.

Have I missed something? I've seen no mention of how large this class is, and little mention of how the trainer set forth, communicated, and enforced rules. Also no mention of discussing the incident in class with those involved. I've attended classes that were utter chaos . .. too large, no one can hear the trainer, people pretty much doing what they see fit. Such classes may be ok for easy-going dogs whose owners want to learn basics, but they are not appropriate for working through the problems of reactive or DA dogs. The club or the trainer or whoever set up the class should be ensuring the safety of everyone involved. Should this situation have come to a bad end, I would guess that the club or the trainer would be legally liable, moreso than the owner of the aggressive dog. From what I've read (not everything carefully) the humans involved learned from this event . . . other than aversion.

I don't have much to add, other than to say KISS. Too many treatments at once and you'll never figure out what is working. Also, remember, histamic reactions are at least as often an out-of-balance, over-reactive, immune system as they are a weak immune system. It's hard to achieve balance when you're juggling several meds/supplements.

No one is at fault. This is a training situation. You can't learn if you don't have permission to make mistakes. If the attack is serious, the person running the class is responsible. Such situations should not be allowed to develop. I would hope that the trainer would use the event to teach a lesson, though.

It's easy to romanticize. In the 60s and 70s people didn't think twice about drowning unwanted puppies and kill rates in shelters were extremely high. (I got Turnip, my first dog, when the neighbors appeared saying "sure hate to drown these pups"). As for vaccinations . . . parvo didn't appear until the 1978 and it took a few years for vaccinations to be developed. So pressure for vaccination was low in the 70s. I don't know how active distemper vaccination programs were . . . but I'd guess not very active until the 1990s. p.s. I grew up in the 50s, so saw the 70s as a young adult. It's easy to think the time of your childhood was problem-free. Kids get shielded from problems, or look right at problems and see nothing wrong.

In my kennel days we sometimes constructed warm 'caves' for small dogs by bending weld-mesh into an arch and piling blankets on top of it. Then place the cave on or over the dog's bed. We started doing this for cats, and then found it worked for dogs as well. That is, many dogs preferentially sought out the 'cave' for a sleeping place, and if you stuck your hand into it on a cold morning you could tell it was warm. Heating pads didn't usually work cause the dogs generally avoided them. Seems more natural to keep a dog warm by giving it an environment that preserves its body heat.

The dogs being advertized as pocket pitbulls in our area are not described as ratters. The term seems to be being used by rescue organizations to describe smaller pit-like dogs. . . including a girl who looks a bit chihuahua like that was seized in a raid on a dogfighting ring . . . http://gainesville.craigslist.org/pet/4383249123.html

Have you talked to the owners or left them a note? I would do that before trying to contact the authorities (who are not interested anyway). There's a chance that it's just a passing thing . . . moving house, dog disoriented, people running between locations . . the situation may settle down.

my error . . . some silly drag and drop glitch put Cavalier in the middle, not the front. Have fixed in the OP. The website is pretentious in the extreme, claiming links to royalty.

Yep, this ^. Only small dogs are allowed in retirement villages. NOT NECESSARILY!!!!! Don't self-censor! Do put pressure for broader tolerance. If you believe it's true, you make it true! There are several thousand 55+ residential developments in Australia. They are not all the same. For example, I'd expect many retirement villages have had experiences with assistance dogs, and have developed tolerance of Labradors and perhaps also goldies. If a dog is proposed as a companion/service animal, eg., to provide emotional support through the transition to retirement, and the pup is sourced from a kennel that specializes in assistance dogs, I would guess many places would set aside prejudices against medium to large dogs. I too am looking at buying a self contained unit in a retirement village. My comment regarding small dogs comes as a result of my many enquiries to those who advertise units as being pet friendly. Though I have a history of spinal problems and indeed current issues with said spinal problems it is not my intention to imply my two CKCS are assistance dogs. That would be dishonest of me. I believe the lady in question is in search a companion dog. No mention is made of her needing an assistance dog/emotional support dog. It has indeed been said that the lady is fit and healthy. A large breed puppy would take time to train and pups are rambuctious until they're obedience trained. This is from personal experience with my former large breed dogs (Rottweilers). I wouldn't take the risk of body corporate or unit management informing me that I must get rid of my dog because it does not meet their pet friendly requirements. It is much safer both for dog owner/unit owner to comply with the conditions set out by the body corporate right from the start so there is no question of the dog being too large and rambunctious for a retirement village. It would be devastating for the dog owner to have to part with their dog. It would also be unfair to the dog. Why risk it? I would not give up on finding a body corporate that permits large to medium dogs. As previously noted, my mother was able to find a very nice assisted living facility that would allow her to have her Labrador, and get another dog when the Lab passed away. The place was private, not a chain, and Quaker run. The residents were encouraged to play an active role in governance and many did. The second dog Mom got while in assisted living, btw, was a rescue, and didn't work out well. He wasn't friendly to other residents, he was DA, and he was terrified of walking on linoleum (many of the common spaces in the place had lino floors). He eventually went back to the rescue (Mom adopted on the condition that the dog could be returned if he didn't work out). Molly (the Labrador) was not an assistance dog, and I do not advocate trying to fake any dog as an assistance dog. I merely stated that a place that has had experience with Labradors as assistance dogs may be more open to them as pets, especially if they come from a kennel that specializes in assistance dogs. Anyone who knows anything about aging can tell you that many many dogs provide emotional support and comfort to people in their later years. Rotties are, so to speak, XL rather than L, and have a very different reputation than Labbies. Finding a place that would allow a Rotti would be difficult -- even though many Rotties are sweet, lovely dogs.

There are far worse things happening in the exotic animal trade. According to http://terriermandot...ike-adults.html Zoos routinely over-breed animals because tiger cubs and baby zebras boost attendance and generate profits. Cute baby animals quickly grow up, however, and that's a problem. It turns out that the world has more caged lions, tigers and zebras than it knows what to do with. What to do? Answer: canned shooting preserves in Texas. It's not an accident that at one point nine board members of the San Antonio Zoo owned hunt preserves. Not all exotic animals used in canned hunts come from large zoos. Many come from small zoos and private breeders of large exotic animals. If you have a checkbook in this country, you can buy anything from a lion to a bear, and from a bobcat to a gemsbok. And if you have ever bought a wildlife magazine with amazing shots of baby cougars, lynx, red fox, black bear, and wolf, you are a small part of the problem. Most of those pictures were taken in private "photography zoos," and at least some of those baby animals were later sold, as adults, to canned hunts.

Andrea Chisholm ran a commercial kennel breedingCavalier King Charles Spaniels http://www.strathglasskennel.com/ They have been up to some other stuff, however: http://www.sun-senti...0,4506015.story Runaway 'Scottish aristocrats' nabbed at Port Everglades By Brittany Shammas, Sun Sentinel 9:05 a.m. EDT, April 3, 2014 UPDATE: During a Thursday morning extradition hearing, Colin and Andrea Chisholm agreed to voluntarily return to Minnesota to face fraud charges. The couple signed paperwork and told Broward County Court Judge John "Jay" Hurley they are willing to be extradited. Minnesota authorities have 30 days to come pick the couple up. The two were being sought by authorities in Minnesota before being taken into custody at Port Everglades on Tuesday. Check back as this story will be updated. Original story follows: For seven weeks or so they have been on the run — a pair of "Scottish aristocrats'' who, according to authorities, lived a life of luxury while collecting food stamps, welfare and Medicaid from two states. But on Tuesday, Andrea and Colin Chisholm III were behind bars in Broward County Jail, awaiting their fate. Photos: Spring Break in Fort Lauderdale Deported from the Bahamas and nabbed at Port Everglades late Monday, the "Lord" and "Lady" are being held without bail for potential extradition to Minnesota. The couple will face welfare fraud charges for allegedly taking more than $167,000 in government benefits during a span of about seven years. During the same period, the couple were funneling millions through bank accounts they controlled. "Thank God," said Virginia Nance Chisholm, who was married to Colin Chisholm for more than 20 years and helped investigators build their case against him. "I am honestly glad. Now the hard work begins, to make sure they don't get loose and do more things." Chisholm's daughter, 34-year-old Katy Strain, said: "He is an unbelievable scam artist who deserves everything he gets now. He's my dad and I love him, but he deserves everything he gets." According to officials in Hennepin County, Minn., who are pursuing criminal charges against them, Andrea Lynne Chisholm, 54, and Colin A.J. Chisholm, III, 62, were found after an "exhaustive" search that began at their $1.6 million house on Lake Minnetonka in Minnesota and stretched all the way to the Bahamas. The Miami FBI and other federal agencies stepped in last week to help. On Monday, the Chisholms were visited in Freeport, Bahamas, by police, who told them their visas had expired. Officers escorted the couple, their 7-year-old son and dog onto a ship headed to Fort Lauderdale, a county press release said. It was around 11 p.m. that the Bahamas Express arrived at Port Everglades and Broward Sheriff's deputies took Andrea and Colin Chisholm III into custody, sheriff's spokeswoman Dani Moschella said. They went peacefully. Their son and dog were turned over to other family members, according to the Hennepin County release. Authorities in Minnesota had little to say about the capture. It was "certainly what we were hoping for," said Chuck Laszewski, a spokesman for Hennepin County prosecutor Mike Freeman. "We're just waiting to see how this goes," he said. Ports around Florida were on the lookout for the Chisholms after authorities in Minnesota announced the charges against them about 10 days ago. According to a criminal complaint filed in Hennepin County, they took in government benefits first from Minnesota, then Florida, then — for about a two-year period — both, simultaneously. The amount of money the Chisholms got from the Sunshine State cannot be released, authorities said. Officials with the state Department of Children and Families are reviewing the allegations against the couple and a separate investigation could follow.

Better solution. Don't buy any pup without a purchase contract in writing. This problem is not unique to one malinois pup in perth. There are shonky dealers everywhere, and not providing papers isn't the only way they shortchange customers. I wouldn't be real worried about a well-established breeder who comes with recommendations from people you know. But I would be suspect of someone who advertizes their wares primarily on the internet. That's almost as bad as buying from a pet shop.

Yep, this ^. Only small dogs are allowed in retirement villages. NOT NECESSARILY!!!!! Don't self-censor! Do put pressure for broader tolerance. If you believe it's true, you make it true! There are several thousand 55+ residential developments in Australia. They are not all the same. For example, I'd expect many retirement villages have had experiences with assistance dogs, and have developed tolerance of Labradors and perhaps also goldies. If a dog is proposed as a companion/service animal, eg., to provide emotional support through the transition to retirement, and the pup is sourced from a kennel that specializes in assistance dogs, I would guess many places would set aside prejudices against medium to large dogs.

I believe that most believe the science that they want to believe . . . no question that there are health and social arguments both for and against spey/neuter. Having lost a bitch at 9 years to an aggressive uterine tumor, I favor doing a spey at six or seven years. Repro system cancers are often late onset, and many would be prevented by a spey (or neuter? not sure if testicular cancers tend to be late onset?). In dogs where testosterone is a problem, I'm in favor of early castration (too bad they don't do it for humans with testosterone management problems).

Lifestyle village can mean 55+ independent living communities. Quite a few of these allow dogs. I'm pretty sure some allow larger dogs. Probably more common for communities where you buy in than in communities where you rent. It was in the US, not Oz, but my mother lived in two such places. Both allowed her to have her Labrador . .. and when the Lab went over the rainbow bridge, she got a GSD X. They required only that she have a plan for someone to care for the dog if she was unable. Of course, there would have been big trouble if the dog wasn't well behaved . . . but in general, everybody loved the dog, and a lot of people who didn't have their own dogs delighted in having Mom's dog around.

As an older woman (I'm 65 so you can say 'older') who prefers large dogs, I'd suggest one of the smaller hounds. They tend to be ok with a small yard and very sociable. Robust with kids. Noisy if left outdoors at night, but otherwise not bad (not yappy). Beagle, basset, grand or petit basset griffon verdeen, maybe even fox hound. Most hounds will wander, but small units generally have good fences. They're adaptable to a variety of activity levels.

50 is NOT elderly!

The right to confront your accuser has deep roots in common law. For good reason. If someone complains about your dogs, you would want to know who it was to decide whether the complaint was justified, or whether it was based on some grudge. Even more so if the charge was theft or something carrying heavy criminal penalties. If such matters become serious, and the person against whom the complaint is lodged faces serious penalties, I'd guess there's a good chance that the complainant's name will be released.

US goes to extremes on both ends . . . lots of teacups and mini's around. Mini potbelly pigs are increasingly common. Then there are pocket pets = sugar gliders. I've never heard of a pitterpat . . . googled and, you're right, they've been around for a long time . . . I guess that name doesn't catch on here cause it's too cutesy and the pit crowd goes more for spunk.