sandgrubber

Few vets get rich. Running a practice isn't cheap. They have to pay for their overhead somehow. Maybe the owners of vet practice chains are raking it in: I avoid chains because they tend to get vets right out of school, and I would prefer a vet with a few years of practice. The real money hogs in the system are the veterinary pharmaceutical manufacturers. The mark ups on everyday dog meds, like flea and tick prevention, are horrendous. If you purchase the commercial livestock version of a drug like, say, ivomectin, your cost per dose is often 1/10, or less, of what you would pay for the same amount of active ingredient in a canine formulation.

Do some specific research & you'll find you've over-generalised. You need to match your good intentions about a petition re RSPCA NSW, with accurate information on the nature of the problem. It's not just a case of 'too many dogs'.... it's degree of risk factors around their being bred, raised & homed. At lower risk for developing behaviour problems & being dumped, are those puppies bred & raised, with much thought & planning, by breeders who socialise their dogs well (in a more home-style setting, where their efforts are not commercial). This tends to fit registered breeders.... as UQ research actually sussed out. That same research showed that these people also tended to have better control over number of litters. Diva posted an excellent example of this. It's for that reason that RSPCA Qld.... in one of their newsletters, urged people buying puppies/dogs to go to breeders who socialise their dogs well....or to their own shelters or to responsible rescue groups. Higher risk dogs.... that is, those more likely to develop behaviour problems (like timidity or aggression)... tend to come from unregistered breeders like backyarders & the puppy factories. US research, not surprisingly, found that puppies homed from petshops are more likely to develop such problems. Because their source is not those that tend to socialise well.... but like backyarders & puppy factories. With a next possible pit-stop being dumped in pounds/shelters.... like the RSPCA run. So the dogs they finish up with, are slanted towards those who were born/bred/homed to be at higher risk. Which means that behavioral testing & rehabilitation are critical. As Aphra posted, some pounds respond by being innovative. So numbers, alone, do not tell the whole story. PLEASE, please give references so people can look things up and decide for themselves! Naming an institution is NOT a way to reference unless you're talking to an in group.

Plastic bottles and metal cans have the additional benefit of making the pup tolerant of loud, sudden noises. They may be problematic if the pup is in the house and you value your sleep. I wonder if anyone has researched the relationship between toys in puppyhood and fear of loud noises in adulthood.

Disease burdens are highly localized. I would say (1) find a vet who can talk to you intelligently about the best vaccination schedule for your area, based on experience and (2) follow that vet's advice. My vet says there is so much parvo in this area, and distemper epidemics are not unknown, that the more aggressive 3 vaccination schedule is worth the extra cost. She advises use of live, as opposed to killed vaccines. I don't remember the details re. which brands, but she had a rationale that made sense.

I'll bet the 'heavy police guard' at the hospital got a laugh or two out of the situation. Having to get his cock stitched up may have had more impact on this perp than whatever punishment the 'justice' system dishes out. Give the dog a medal ;-)

Kudos to the family for noting the dog's reaction and checking things out. And good on the dog for protecting the child. I don't think the dog should be considered 'aggressive', however. Protective and loyal, yes. If the dog had been aggressive it would have responded to everyone coming through the door with hostile behavior. It was the selectivity of reaction that tipped the owners off to the fact that something was wrong.

and scientists are such a serious bunch themselves. :laugh: I am a scientist. Maybe I'm too literal and sometimes lack humor. Some scientists are great jokers (for example, have a read of Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman! (Adventures of a Curious Character)). But you got it all wrong. No scientist worth his/her salt tries to prove anything. Science can only disprove; it cannot prove. See any discussion of scientific method. As for dogs, most of them have some sense of humor, but some are dead serious. I love this trait, and wish there were a way to select for it in puppy temperament testing. But, alas, the dog world generally lacks humor, and have made little effort to recognize or evaluate this most endearring trait in dogs.

That's a big if for government. To some people all large powerful dogs, with emphasis on certain breeds, are menacing, no matter what they do.

Horrible! I'd rather hear that they had seized the dog and locked up the owner.

I don't mean to be insensitive, but sometimes my curiosity gets the better of sensitivity. So if apologies are due, please accept them. I've just come across a verbatum repeat of your text, with photos attached, in another blog. See: http://leemakennels.com/blog/dog-breeding/dog-breeding-isnt-always-pretty/#comment-125559 Your avitar does not look like a GR. Were you at one time a GR breeder? Or has this story come from somewhere else?

I've never had a problem with cardboard. If they ingest a little it goes right through...at least with Labradors.

I've handled this problem by finding an old pallet and some old carpet scraps (you can generally get them free from the bin behind a carpet company). Use roofing nails or carpet tacks to secure the carpet to the pallet. Dogs find this hard to destroy, and even if they tear up the carpet, you can replace it for nothing.

HORRID. AR x profit motive is a particularly ugly crossbreed!!!!!! <img src="http://www.dolforums.com.au/public/style_emoticons/default/crying.gif" alt="" class="bbc_emoticon">

But do they use Bio Sensor? The point Border Wars was making is that Bio Sensor is getting flogged as a way to create super dogs by someone who is a bit of a snake oil salesman...when the folks who developed the program and worked with the dogs it produced considered it unsuccessful.

I posted in an emotional state and didn't explain well. I'm in the position of needing to select one pup to keep. I hope to end out with temperament like the dam...who has been a fantastic dog. I wish I had better skills and tools to make the selection. Go to The Dogs West site and check out the material presented to people who want to become breeders. Virtually nothing on how to breed for temperament. Have a breeder over to help you choose the pup you keep. What do they look at...maybe they are evaluating temperament in the back of their mind, but all they articulate is physical conformation. At least that has been my experience. Ask for material to help you select pups and you end out with Pat Hastings Puppy Puzzle. Sure there are temperament tests. Put a litter of Lab pups through Volhard and you get mostly 3s and 4s....repeat the test the next day or with a different tester and you'll get a somewhat different set of 3s and 4s. I'll bet most dog fanatics have raised one or two dogs whose temperament was well above the crowd. For working dog types this would be a super working dog. For pet people it might be a dog that was outstanding in its dignity, or a dog that was super attentive and affectionate...or just extremely smart. We (hopefully) select to keep dogs temperaments within the limits prescribed by the standard. Many breeders can and do spot the pup with temperament problems by 8 weeks. I don't think most of us have the skills to recognize or select outstanding temperament, at least not at 8 weeks. Maybe it can't be done. I wish, looking back, that I had invested more heavily in trying to identify and perfect temperament. Very big ask, btw. If you're considering use of a stud dog whom you will probably never meet, you will never meet you may find information on working ability, or a few words like 'mellow' or 'tireless' or 'high drive', but the information available on physical conformation will be much more complete than that on temperament. Unfortunately, temperament doesn't show well in a photograph.

http://www.border-wa...-super-dog.html Provides a harsh critique including lots of comments from those who worked on the program and military brass who worked with the dogs it produced. This is one of a series of four articles. Extracts: A member of the Vietnam Security Police recalls the graduates from the Super Dog program: The dogs resembled a German Shepherd, but most had a far away look in their eyes . The initial litters had been raised in a kennel environment. When the dogs were exposed to common elements of an outside environment (birds, grass, etc), they were afraid, confused and skittish . Instructors of one class with several of these dogs demonstrated how the dogs refused to cross a line painted on the pavement. Other Instructors joked with them about how cheap it would be to kennel them. All you had to do was paint a circle around a doghouse. Later litters were taken outside to run and play in a fenced in obstacle course area. This was an attempt to socialize them to the outdoors. Many of these dogs then associated a obstacle course as a play area and could not be controlled easily off leash. That’s hardly the sort of results puppy raisers would want to achieve for dogs being placed in homes, around children, and with the expectation to be good citizens. Mike Lister, Instructor at Fort Benning recalls his experience with “super” dogs: It was the opinion of those at Ft. Benning that the dogs were great at scent discrimination tasks, but were not suitable for aggression tasks . They were much shyer and sensitive than the dogs we got from the public . I believe Col. Castleberry addressed this issue, by having more human interaction for the pups as they were growing up. We were told in the beginning there was very little human interaction. The dogs were also very sensitive to correction . At Ft. Benning we followed the principles of conditioning when training our dogs. When using level of titration to correct our dogs, we only needed the lowest level for the Bio Dogs. Usualloy voice or a look was enough of a correction. As regarding stress, they didn’t handle it as well as other dogs. The Bio Dogs were the only neonatal dogs we trained . Denzil’s summary of Dr. William J. Fuller on the prospect of the Military setting up another GSD breeding program: The breeding program must be long-term and will require a large number of dogs. He states that the government has already taken that route once [super Dog], and the results were not favorable enough to continue. Regarding the biosensor program, he feels that it failed for the same reasons the ancient Greeks failed to make a superman. Dr. Fuller feels that great virtuosos or any other biological creation of marked superiority are “genetic accidents,” and that any program that tries to produce this superiority in a consistent manner is doomed to fail. He thinks a more reasonable goal would be to develop a program that would consistently produce good quality working dogs. William D. Gilbert on the “Disposition of the Military Working Dog Program:” The main reasons expressed in the letter for ending the program were that the program was a “questionable venture,” because there were no requirements for genetically superior dogs in the U.S. Air Force. The letter acknowledged that the program had been a success in producing “enviable pedigree lineages,” which could conceivably provide a detection capability, but this was not viewed as a projected requirement for the future. Debbie Kay, private biosensor dog contractor: Concerning the biosensor program, and based on what she has heard from various people associated with the program, it is her opinion that it was discontinued because the program was dominated with research-oriented personnel. And that there was no over-all coordination, and there was significant jealousy between the various factions that came into play as the money began to dry up. Remember that despite being dominated by research (versus results) oriented people, the biosensor program never published one paper on their findings. Dr. George Lees, shared his experience with the biosensor program with Denzil: He went on to say that the dog fancy community is very fragmented in their beliefs , and whatever they believe as individuals, they are willing to discuss with anyone that will listen and convince them “that they are right and everybody else is crazy.” He concluded by stating, that in his opinion, there were 2 reasons why the biosensor program failed. First, there was no clear vision or target of who needed, or how to best utilize the dogs. Second, the research team became impatient due to unrealistic expectations from upper echelon leadership, and a tightening of the budget purse strings. This last bit is what I find most revealing. Dr. Lees pegs the purebred dog community exactly: fragmented, back biting, and followers of whatever messiah or snake-oil salesmen comes along with a nice sounding story with promises of ribbons and show success. It amazes me how many breeders proudly advertise their adherence to “Super Dog” or “Bio-Sensor” and many who claim amazing results from 3-5 seconds of tickling a dog’s toes. Yet they do and it’s seemingly part of being a “reputable breeder.” The conformity isn’t so much in the dogs, it’s in the culture. Do what everyone else does, don’t think and certainly don’t question. Battaglia’s Bio-Sensor is ridiculous on its face, but why are there so few of us who have ever questioned this? The warning signs are all there: Promises of amazing health and performance benefits for less than 3 minutes of work total, a celebrity faux-Doctor pitching it, no published results, and claims of secret knowledge (classified by the government!). After seeing what the truth of the biosensor program is and its limited and unsuccessfyl use of early neurological stimulation, it is clear that Carmen Battaglia is a liar and a fraud. Here's an extract about the promoter from another article in the series. You'll remember Dr. Battaglia from his resurrection of Lloyd Brackett and his infamous "Brackett's Formula." Dr. Battaglia gives lectures on cruise ships to up-and-coming brown-nosers in the AKC hierarchy who want to buy the secret knowledge and pay the right gate keepers to fast track show success. He's the closest thing the AKC community has to a celebrity doctor. But don't get too comfortable with the idea that he's a medical doctor, he isn't. He's a Ph.D. doctor, which he readily advertises at the end of his publications: Carmen L Battaglia holds a Ph.D. and Masters Degree from Florida State University. As an AKC judge, researcher and writer, he has been a leader in promotion of breeding better dogs and has written many articles and several books. Dr. Battaglia is also a popular TV and radio talk show speaker. His seminars on breeding dogs, selecting sires and choosing puppies have been well received by the breed clubs all over the country. Those interested in learning more about his seminars should contact him directly. Visit his website at http://www.breedingbetterdogs.com What he doesn't advertise anywhere that I've found despite an extensive search is what subjects his degrees are in. So I contacted the Curriculum Publications Coordinator at Florida State University and found out the unpublished truth: B.A. Psychology 1958, M.S. Social Welfare 1960, PhD Joint Doctoral Program in Criminology Corrections and Sociology 1968. So by way of education, Dr. Battaglia is more equipped to run a prison than a breeding program. His dissertation was titled "Deviant behavior of parolees and the decision-making process of parole supervisors." The next indicator that "Bio-Sensor" is quack science is because it's being SOLD as a how-to guide to success without having been vetted in any way by scientists in peer reviewed publications resulting from studies done according to the scientific method. Dr. Battaglia sells his program along with breeding and puppy selection advice as part of his self-help for dog breeding commercial venture. You can buy books, videos, DVDs, and subscribe to his newsletter and attend his lectures. In accordance with yet another quackery red flag, Dr. Battaglia is pitching program that offers medical benefits but he (nor anyone else) has no peer-reviewed journal articles on his protocol. And it's not for lack of trying. If you visit his website you will find a link to request his so far unpublished journal article. When you do so, you will be e-mailed a copy of an extended version of his Bio-Sensor article spruced up to look like an actual experiment with "Methods and Materials" and everything. It appears from the file that Dr. Battaglia has attempted to get this article published since at least 2007, but he will warn you that the article is still under intense review and thus you can not share it. This wouldn't be the first time that the "Bio Sensor" program has been used to sell a self-help program, however, as Dr. Battaglia collaborated with Stanley Coren–king of marketing shoddy dog science to pet owners in book form–who included the information in his book Why Does My Dog Act That Way? Battaglia and Coren's considerable influence on the dog fancy combined with Battaglia offering the super simplified how-to instructions for achiving super dog success for free on his website as a teaser for his suite of videos, books, and lectures the "Early Neurological Stimulation" program has saturated the hobby pet breeder culture. Breeder testimonials and reprints of the method are everywhere.

I will probably give up breeding after this litter. But as I sit and watch the nine little buggers, trying to figure out which one to keep, I'm saddened by the notion that I've been asking the wrong questions for many years. The world of dog people I live in has taught me to look for good head and good bone and good coat and good tail and good movement, and balance and so on and so forth according to the standard. No one has ever said to me: "Watch the pups. Play with them. Do some temperament testing. Figure out which one you would most like to live with. If he or she is not too ugly and shows no signs of ill health, keep that pup." I wish the purebred dog world was as articulate in describing temperament as we are in describing physical appearance. Cause when I look back on all the dogs I have owned, the dog's temperament and intelligence has mattered a lot more important than its looks.

The main reason I don't shave my Labbies is I'm too chincy to pay a groomer to do it :). Also, I find I can greatly alleviate their heat stress by: (1) allowing them indoors where there is air con and (2) combing out the dead undercoat ...which also saves me from sweeping/vacuuming up dog hair.

The basic problem is under-appreciation (denial?) of nature and an automatic assumption that all is nurture. Experienced dog people generally end out respecting that some things are hardwired from birth. I just wish breeders were as consistent and persistent and insistent on breeding for temperament as they are on breeding for the physical features described by their breed standards...or the interpretation of the breed standard that is in favor this year/decade. Purebred dogs SHOULD NOT behave like creatures that have been beaten and abused. In my book fear-cringing, weeing in inappropriate situations, and other traits that present as having been abused -- when there is no history of abuse -- are serious faults. Note, the opposite is pretty common. There are plenty of dogs who have suffered abuse and still present as normal, friendly dogs. I think those dogs deserve to be celebrated for their robustness.

Perhaps you don't realise how fast cops are taught to draw and fire? Standard drill is draw and fire three shots in two seconds... Things can go pear shaped very, very quickly for police. They are trained accordingly. Sad situation. RIP for the dog and sympathy for the owner. Such situations require good snap judgement. Unfortunately, not everyone, police or otherwise, has this 24/7 (I certainly don't). It may be necessary to train cops to react fast with deadly force, but sometimes the consequences mean that innocent people, or dogs, get shot. Such is life. I hope the officer, at least, has the grace to apologize...and has thought about what he has done sufficiently that he won't end out shooting some kid wearing a hoody who presents as threatening or a mentally unstable person whose actions register as dangerous.

Wow, that is scary. I would have thought that the spray would mess with the vision and smell to the point that the dog wouldn't be able to continue an attack, assuming it didn't already have hold of the person or dog? Now a taser might do the job nicely :D But seriously, a walking type stick that could emit a suitable electric shock would be great for the elderly. Apparently pepper spray doesn't always stop the truly focussed dog, a taser however might have an affect or a cattle prod but of course they are illegal to carry unless you are a police officer. I think the way the elderly are being attacked by human beings and dogs these days, there should be something they can use in self defense. However that won't be allowed because the powers that be would be afraid of the wrong people getting hold of the devices, of course the wrong people have already got more than enough weapons anyway. (Not to mention vicious dogs in some cases) It's a case of the normal nice folks not being allowed to defend themselves, in this topsy turvy world might is always right. Back in the world of the rule followers where we all live, we just have to bind our wounds and bury our dead because if we arm everyone chaos will reign, when you get attacked by someone's "friendly dog, whose never done anything like this before" it pretty much feels like chaos is already here. Sorry for the sarcasm guys, I just read an article about an elderly woman in her 80's who was seriously injured by an off leash dog (that guess what...has never done it before) while walking her dog. (On leash). ???? How about an umbrella? I came across a suggestion that the surprise of having a brelly open in its face will stop many dogs.

What not-so-little sweeties! Are your girls related? Tolerant bitches have a big advantage . . . with mine, Granny dog is at least as enthusiastic about picking up and licking up mess than Mum. I think this is pretty common among related Labradors.

I'm not sure what people mean about desexing being a problem. In my experience dog coats are enormously variable, even within the breed, and some dogs coats change considerably depending on what they are fed.. My old girl's outer coat (Labrador) went from too soft to semi-hard (as specified by the breed standard) as she aged, but her heavy undercoat and prolific blowing of coat has remained constant. Strangely, her daughter (nursing at the moment) was born with a hard outer coat and a relatively thin and short undercoat. The old girl was pretty wavy, as Labbies go, but after desexing, her coat is straighter. My present litter includes relatively long fluffy coats and some sleek-looking coats. Btw, standard be damned. Living in a hot climate, I will always breed for a light and short undercoat (with Labradors). Winning shows is less important than the dog's health and comfort.

+1 There's a sort of altruist who loves the idea that they have rescued a poor abused dog.

We're always talking about the nerd to supervise kids around dogs. This blogger points out that most parents don't know what to watch for, so their supervision isn't effective. I'm sure there are better summaries out there, but to me this one seems clear and short. http://www.robinkbennett.com/2013/08/19/why-supervising-dogs-and-kids-doesnt-work/#comment-2437