sandgrubber

Then the breeder deserves a look over. If these are not the first 'ugly' dogs he or she has released to the public, it's time he or she faced some sort of penalty. Some breeds get a bad rap cause some breeders deliberately run bloodlines that are bound for trouble.

I can imagine that term being applied to me one of these days.

It was Dimitri Balyaev who started the experiments. Work began around 1960 and continues to this day. You can also buy a domesticated fox (very expensive, neutered). Google Russian fox domestication and you'll get hundreds of interesting articles. In selecting for friendliness to humans, they found degrees of domestication. They eventually had to add a super domesticated category above their original top category to accommodate foxes whose affectionate responses were off the original chart. So, yes, if dogs and foxes are alike in range of temperament, dogs can potentially be bred to manifest a wide range between mean/wild and spooky/friendly. I think most dog people have seen the extent of this range. It's not all genetics, but it can take a lot of management and training to overcome genetics.

you'd be crucified for doing it now, regardless of the bitch being up to it or not. Of course there's no science, it's pen pushers and animal lib drawing the lines in the sand these days, regardless of them being wrong. But hey, they have to protect the dogs from the puppy farmers some how Meanwhile, thanks to 'improved' and often very costly fertility therapies, women are having babies into their 40s and 50s. Go figure!

Not necessarily. If the straps are narrow they concentrate the force over a small area, thus increasing the likelihood of snapping bones or decapitating. Going airborne might be better if the dog ended out hitting a flat surface.

Sounds like score one for nature in the nature vs nurture debate! Hmm. High propensity to die in late adolescence due to high activity levels, impulsiveness, fearlessness, and tendency to attack. Good thing they're bantam weights. In a big dog (or a human) these features would be scary!

The Finnish Kennel Club keeps lots and lots of statistics and has recently made their databases available in English for searching. I've been browsing cause of death data by breed and was a bit shocked by data on JRT's that seem to show twice as many dying of accidents as of old age. Similar proportions show for other small terriers. See http://jalostus.kenn...x?R=345&Lang=en I know the earthdog types are prone to snake bite in Australia . . . anybody have any idea why they are so accident prone in Finnland? Or is there something strange going on here? Btw, the data are fascinating. I wish more KC's kept and published such records. You can look up other breeds by scrolling to the group and breed, then clicking on health statistics (to the right of screen), then scrolling to "Cause of Death" statistics. They have other health stats as well. Beware, you may not like what you see. Not sure why, maybe it's because the data include accidents, lost dogs, euthanasia for behavioural reasons, etc., but the numbers shown make most breeds look shorter-lived than you might expect.

"Our profession appears to have a complacent attitude towards the use of personal protection," said the study's author, Dr Navneet Dhand. "Not using appropriate protection when necessary is just like having unprotected sex with a stranger and thinking that it will be alright." It would be good to see the full study. It would be good to see data on the diseases contracted. It would be good to know if Dr Dhand is of a faith the believes animals are unclean -- or if his or her research was supported by a company that sells 'hygenic' products to vets. Frankly, I'd prefer not to add $20+ to the cost of veterinary visits to pay for a bunch of disposable attire when a good old fashioned scrub down and reasonable precaution might do just as well. Clean freaks and germ phobias contribute greatly to children's succeptibility to asthma. I'm all for evidence based measures to prevent contagion, but I think the article smacks of hysteria and fixing things that ain't broke.

Socialization is a big thing but SO IS GENETICS! Good, ethical, quality breeders are less common than one would hope. I once knew a beautiful and much used stud dog, great show record, whose unofficial call name includes the name A##hole, cause he's intractable, in a breed that, according to the standard, is biddable, and it is well known that he produces intractable pups. Some show people so title blind that they will overlook serious temperament defects through title blindness. I was amazed at the number of 'good' breeders who used such a dog knowing his defects. To me, breeding from a dog with temperament defects is worse than lack of socialization, cause it persists through generations and contaminates the gene pool. If you get an 8 week old pup who has not been well socialized, you have a good chance of fixing the problem. If the pup carries genes for bad temperament, it's a strike against generations to come.Large scale breeders are important cause they produce so many pups. Lets hope that whoever ends out buying this place, which looks like a lovely facility, has a conscience, and realizes that there's good market demand for healthy, well socialized pups.Ostracizing and condemning large scale breeders is an awful thing to do. Far betters to encourage, pressure, and cajole them in the direction of producing higher quality.

Many low density areas in the US are the same. Unless you're causing problems, you can keep a few animals. The cities get more particular, and some states are particular. Now if you want to raise pigs, it's a different matter (though where I am in Florida they are ok with miniature pig varieties as household pets in semi-rural areas).

Ick factor aside, has anyone seen evidence that the old-time vet, relaxed attitude toward hygine caused harm? It's well documented that human hospitals are accumulating an unpleasant load of antibiotic-resistant bugs, and better hygine is needed. Is there any evidence that the same is happening in veterinary practices?

Yes, Kindi is a wonderful time, your child brings every childhood disease home to share. But how many of those teachers have died from those childhood diseases? The zoonotic diseases that vets catch are generally innocuous and not a big deal- Hendra has a greater than 50% mortality rate and Q fever can have massive impacts on peoples life. A little more serious than a cold and the reason Vets lack of care for personal protection is concerning. There is a vaccination for Q fever...and from the link you provided, it looks like I'm as much at risk in my compost pile as a vet is doing a Ceasar. Hendra is localized and associated with sick horses. Vets know when they are at risk, and I'd be surprised if they didnt take appropriate precautions in areas where Hendra was known. Kindergarteners could carry scary diseases, too...but it's rare for them to do so. I knew someone who picked up measles as an adult while teaching kindergarten....and nearly died from it.

Once or twice in a lifetime isn't bad, unless the diseases are quite serious and hard to treat. Good on vets for not being paranoid. After all, the statistics on kindergarten teachers catching infectious diseases must run 50% a year. We wouldn't want them running around in masks and gowns. The only surgeries I've witnessed are Ceasars and castrations. I'd say gloves, gowns, and masks would have gotten in the way and made the procedure more expensive.

In the USA you can do your own vaccines, though in many states you can't buy rabies vaccine (required by law everywhere) and you have to have a prescription to buy Heartworm meds. The vet does a test, generally costing $50 plus a consult, before they'll give you a script. In Florida, where I'm living now, almost everyone who keeps dogs has lost one to Heartworm, so the Heartworm thing is no joke. Some breeders get around it by using horse or cow Ivomectin in large doses, but that's not safe for all dogs, and pretty complicated for the average pet owner. The thing you do see here, which I'd think would work in Oz, is public vaccination clinics. These are commonly done on a monthly basis at feed stores, or other animal friendly locations. No appointments ...just wait in line. The dog gets a brief physical exam and shots for $10 to $30, depending on what jabs you get. The vet makes a little money cause there's almost no overhead or wastage of vaccine and they can serve 10 or more patients in an hour. You get stamped vaccination cards, as required by boarding kennels, clubs, etc. unfortunately this doesn't help for Heartworm, cause the test requires a blood draw and some lab work.

DOLers might find this book interesting...both for their kids and as a possibility for fund raising for breed clubs. http://www.thedogpla...he-Dog-Show.pdf P.s. I haven't seen it yet....but it seems to speak to one of the big problems facing the dog world ... How to enlist the next generation. If anyone has seen it I'd love to hear what they think.

Tomorrow morning, May 1, in the 7:30–8 a.m. EDT half-hour timeframe, NBC's Today Show will be airing a segment by NBC reporter Jeff Rossen — @Jeffrossen#RossenReports — which we expect will be a biased, critical, and misleading portrayal of the AKC. Please watch the segment live or on the Today Show website and then go to Rossen Reports and Today.com and NBCNews.com to post your comments in support of AKC and all the responsible dog owners and breeders in this country. We will be watching the segment too, since we are curious to see if picking on animal lovers really helps their ratings! Also, watch for AKC's immediate response to the segment on akcdoglovers.com.

Are you confusing the CKC (continental, not Canadian) with the UKC? The CKC in the US is pretty bogus. No pedigree needed, just some photos and a couple people's testimony. I don't know much about the UKC, other than 1) they register some breeds not recognized by the AKC, and 2) they do require pedigrees and keep closed registries.

Good spoof.Dogs can do well in some shops.Our local big box hardware allows dogs in, as does PetsMart. My two enjoy shopping about as much as the dog park. It's fun taking them in, particularly to the hardware. Almost everybody smiles at them. Bonza seldom gets out with fewer than four tummy rubs.

This isn't AR, but how'd your critters like having one of these things overhead? http://m.youtube.com...p&v=zvyJpuuwcas

Scary crazy people, but it looks like they have some nice working conformation GSDs

I hope there will be better tools available for guiding breeding decisions in the coming decade.The problem with inbreeding, including line breeding, is that it increases homozygosity, and thus increases the likelihood of deleterious genes being expressed. The problem with this statement is that all homozygosity is not equal. Most homozygous pairs are harmless. But the harmful ones can be quite bad, causing blindness, deformities, stillbirths, etc, etc, etc. I think there's general agreement that the genes in the Major Histocompatibility Complex, with dogs, the region known as the DLA, are especially important to health. Tests are coming available to measure the homozygosity / diversity in the DLA. see, eg, http://shop.genoscop...m/en/tests-dog. These tests are new and not cheap, and the methods may change over time. However the y should eventually spare us the difficulty of assembling 10 to 15 generation pedigrees to get a meaningful measure of the COI. And the information they yield will be more relevant to health than the overall measures of genetic diversity.

Inbreeding can cause problems. Look at the wolves at Isle Royale National Park. http://www.mtu.edu/n...story87157.html

I think you can also breed father to daughter but not mother to son. Correct me if I'm wrong. Father to daughter and mother to son do the same damage to the coefficient of inbreeding (COI). Getting an accurate sense of the amount of inbreeding requires ten or more generations of pedigree history. For example, many standard poodles show low genetic diversity due to the 'Wycliffe effect' ....the very major role played by a handful of dogs In the 50s and 60s. Dogs who look fine on the three or five generation pedigree may be strongly inbred due to things that happened in their great great great great great grand sire's time ...or throw in a few more greats.

From my behavioural genetics textbook "Hybrid Vigour or Heterosis is the increase in viability and performance when different inbred strains are crossed." When was the book published, and how much credence does the author have? :) Cattle breeders use it to get up to 50 kg more weaned weight in the F1 calves, you have to use an entirely different breed againif you want to do a second outcross. But it isnt usually worth keeping the heifers from the second cross as the advandage is downhill from there. Most breeders who do this either keep seperate their purebred herd and buy in the outcross bull or have two pure herds and only cross a percentage to keep the rootstock for the future. Do you really want to do that with dogs? Best answer! Everything I learned in biology says hybrid vigor is real. But that doesn't make it something you want to do with dogs. Vigor doesn't necessarily translate to health, and sacrificing breed characteristics isn't something we want to do.

.??? I thought the term originated in botany, where F1 hybrids are usually varietal crosses, and are often robust due to increased heterozygosity. Seed companies love them cause they mess up seed savers...the F2 rarely runs true.