SkySoaringMagpie

From the breed standards and the Saluki extension: Afghan Hound: The Afghan Hound should be dignified and aloof with a certain keen fierceness. Azawakh: Quick, attentive, distant, reserved with strangers and may even be unapproachable, but he can be gentle and affectionate with those he is willing to accept. Borzoi: A coursing hound which must be courageous...sensitive, alert and aloof. Deerhound: Gentle and friendly. Obedient and easy to train because eager to please. Docile and good tempered, never suspicious, aggressive or nervous. Carries himself with quiet dignity. Greyhound: Intelligent, gentle, affectionate and even tempered. Ibizan: Reserved with strangers, not nervous or aggressive. Dignified, intelligent and independent. Irish: "Lambs at home, lions on the chase". Pharaoh: An intelligent, friendly affectionate, playful and alert breed. Saluki: The expression should be dignified and gentle with deep, faithful, farseeing eyes. Characteristic temperament is reserved with strangers, dignified, intelligent and independent, neither nervous nor aggressive. Adolescents should be handled with sensitivity Sloughi: Quiet, of dignified bearing. Noble, haughty and extremely expressive with the instincts of a hunting hound. Loyal to owner, affectionate with family. Aloof with strangers. Whippet: An ideal companion. Highly adaptable in domestic and sporting surroundings. Gentle, affectionate, even disposition.

Fifi makes an important point, this is from the ANKC Saluki Breed Extension: Characteristic temperament is reserved with strangers, dignified, intelligent and independent, neither nervous nor aggressive. Adolescents should be handled with sensitivity. Edited for clarity

Saluki in prey drive:

I think people have responded very moderately to what was a rather inflammatory question. If you posted that question into some of the OFC sighthound groups you'd be eaten alive.

I'm another one for leave it as it is. The whole point of these titles is that not everyone can get one. A Gr Ch which hasn't won a few groups or beaten numerous members of its own breed is not very Grand. I'd also rather see the Ch title given a bit of a boost. So for example, in breeds with registrations over a certain number you should have to make up a certain number of the points by beating others. And Supreme Grand sounds like a chain store pizza. FWIW, I don't have any Grands, I have a boy coming up now who might make the grade in 3 years time. If he doesn't, well, that's life. Edited for grammar.

Depends on the disease and the breed, and by that I mean how likely it is that the other pups will sicken and become seriously illl/die. Ultimately, unless you have legally obtained copies of a vet report that lists microchip numbers and says each of these pups is going to get a disease, you leave yourself open to all sorts of drama if you say something to purchasers. If one of those purchasers is someone likely to use the dog in a breeding program I might, depending on the situation, suggest that they ask the breeder about X problem. For anyone who has half a brain, this is a big clue to check something out without you actually having made an accusation. Otherwise the answer is boring - be part of the solution. Don't be the kind of person who supports witch-hunting, or who gets into the schadenfruede when a problem arises in a competitor's stock, have good answers when discussions about health come up, etc etc

Same here! Let's just say if it wasn't for the dogs, we'd be in designer wardrobes and taking regular overseas holidays. Our figure includes show entries, breed club memberships, etc so is higher than it would be for companion only dogs.

Lots of good advice already, I'll just say a couple of things that I haven't seen explicitly written in this thread. It is not unheard of for young children to kill or seriously injure small dogs. It's not unheard of for puppies to to have short, painful lives as an unsupervised child's plaything before winding up in the vet with a broken back. I'm not talking about budding serial killers, I'm talking about kids with parents who just don't have the insight, energy and skill to supervise a dog and a child so that the dog is never in position where the child can do that kind of damage. It's also not unheard of for parents to refuse to contemplate the idea that their child could hurt a dog even accidentally, and that kind of denial triggers warning bells for breeders. There are plenty of breeders who are disinclined to sell small dogs to families with kids for these reasons, much less to families with kids with special needs. It's not that they don't listen, it's that they are not prepared to take the risk. Everyone says they are responsible, not everyone is. I think the breeder was trying to be helpful by suggesting more robust breeds, and I agree with Sandra that a Stafford sounds like a great idea. On the other hand, I have seen some dogs live miserable lives in families where they were bought for their breed's reputation as robust and tolerant. I will never forget a colleague's Golden Retriever copping all sorts of punishment from the family toddler, and when I said it was risky, they said it wasn't a problem because they deliberately bought a Golden because they were good with kids. Even tolerant baby-sitter dogs need to be supervised with kids, not just because they can snap, but because it's cruel to make them live their lives like that and letting a kid scream in a dog's face, pull its ears and jump on it doesn't teach the kid about appropriate behaviour around animals.

I'd love to see a copy of your report - is it available anywhere public? Or can you send a copy to me? Happy to have the content deleted out, I'm just interested in how you structure it and what you include. Just some general comments. I agree with Alyosha that it would cost money and there's not a lot of that around. I guess the advantage I see is that unlike regulation of the "you may not do this, or this, or this" kind, it leaves sunlight to do the disinfecting rather than ever more ridiculous rules. As someone else pointed out, if extended to all dogs I think it would demonstrate pretty responsible cleanups in most pure breed dogs compared to hunting mixes, race greyhounds, oodles and backyard staff/bullies. I agree there are problems with witch-hunting but I think this is like health issues. If the pure breed dog community can't learn how to say "screw it" to the bullies, we are never going to come to terms with the problems we have in house. For me there is no shame in something going wrong, it's how you deal with it that counts. I can't think of anyone who has been in it over 10 years and has never had something go wrong with a placement. I can think of some people where things go wrong on a regular basis because they just don't care. 1 dog in a shelter because something unfortunate happened is not a pattern like, for example, 4 dogs from the one litter bouncing into rescue with behavioural problems, plus a number of other dogs from the same breeder in rescue and behind backyard litters.

The OP wasn't saying that tho', she said the two existing bitches had had three fights which were increasing in intensity. In that situation I see a real red flag and would not add more dogs, particularly not more bitches, to the household until it was sorted out.

This is what I'd do, those threads make it real in a way that saying it's a risk doesn't. And if she still doesn't listen, you're going to have to detach from it until mother nature gives them an education they can't ignore.

If the current requirement for a dog to be microchipped before sale was extended to include a record of the breeder I think that would make it doable.

Posted this in general to get responses from both breeders and rescuers. Would you be in favour of a system where the canine controls took reports from clubs and from rescue and published a list each year of: - the numbers of rescues in each breed; - the breeding of each of these rescues (eg, kennel prefix or "unregistered"); - who took responsibility for the rescue (eg, club rescue, breeder, public rescue); and, - whether the dog was rehomed, taken back by the breeder or euthanased. Let's presume for the sake of discussion that the list is supported by the submission of documentary evidence (pound listings, microchip details, papers etc).

Having trained stays in obedience I'd say the answer is definitely yes!

This. My first Saluki was an unpopular coat pattern (parti-colour, she's the model for my avatar cartoon). It wasn't a coat I was particularly excited about but I was more interested in getting a well bred Saluki than anything else. Having lived with a parti-colour, I now have a huge soft spot for them and while my subsequent dogs have all been different colours and coat patterns I love a parti. Never been a big fan of cream feathereds which are the most popular Saluki colour, followed by blacks. Probably means i'm going to end up with a cream fluffy one day and all my mates are never going to let me hear the end of it.

The problem is not with you in either case Zug Zug unless you're after a breed that routinely sells for over $2K, and they are rare. I'd be happy the first breeder has not tried to sell you a dog, because I think there's a high risk they haven't prioritised those things in their breeding program. So while it may be disappointing and annoying, it's taking you closer to the right match for you.

I think becks' approach is the best one if you have the time for it. If you don't have the time for it a brief note saying you only sell dogs as companions, not as breeding stock, would do the trick. The rest might be true for you, but I think we need to ask ourselves whether we're saying something that will change hearts and minds, or if we're just defending our position and having a "I'm surrounded by idiots" rant at someone. The latter doesn't do anything for dogs in the long run.

Funny how fussy you get as you get to know a breed, there was probably only one of my breed in all those links that I thought depicted a good dog, and it was the most expensive

My problem with a lot of those products is not the bone issue but how they are prepared, and where they are prepared. I won't feed the dogs any pet treats made in China for example, I just don't have confidence in their pet food safety regulations. A lot of the stuff sitting out in bins has no information on manufacture or origin and the staff have NFI too. I do feed some stuff other owners don't feed, but to the Salukis and Afghans because they will chew rather than hoover. So I feed those dry chicken neck treats - other people I know won't feed chicken necks even raw. Also give them marrow bones from time to time - but that's supervised and I scoop out the marrow for the ones that need help to stay trim. I agree with Espinay that you need to inform yourself, and make judgements about the product and about your breed and your dogs.

First Dog on the Moon comments: http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/09/15/the-story-of-the-prime-minister-the-dog-the-cat-and-the-other-dog/

It happens, but I agree with Bjelkier that those that protest the loudest are often playing the game themselves. It's like people who make a huge song and dance about dirty handling; those are usually the ones running their dog up your dog's rear. I see it as something you come to last as an explanation. First you consider honestly all the other possible explanations (your dog isn't competitive, your handling is average, the style of dog you have isn't one the judge prefers, judge has a thing about heads and your dog's head isn't its fortune, the face's dog is rather good etc) If you can honestly eliminate all that, then you chalk it up to experience and don't show to them again. I am inclined to agree with PF that it starts at committee level. Once you've been showing for a while you get a feel for whether committees tend to appoint mates, and there are some byzantine methods of putting up an appearance of impartiality while deals are still being done. It's not all like that tho', many committees care first and foremost about the reputation of the club.

Human side of the congrats should go to Keshwar, who handled her. I am pretty rubbish on a bike!

My Mabby (Ch Al Muzdaher Farousi Rabha (Imp Bahrain)) passed her ET today in Canberra. Congrats to all the people who passed!

I started out by posting on my wall saying that I thought posting pictures of graphic animal cruelty was gratuitous and worse than unhelpful, it perpetuates the crime of the abuser by giving it wider distribution - unless there is a very specific call to action that FB participants can do and even then I'd question why we need to see a picture. Mostly there isn't, it's just "isn't this terrible?". Well, you don't need me to tell you that, so don't share the pain around. I got some defensive reactions, people who consistently post that kind of thing are often doing it for emotional reasons that mean they don't cope well with criticism or a suggestion they are contributing to a problem. So then I started hiding people who did it. And then FB did one of its enhancements and got rid of my ability to do that. So now they are just off my friends list. Edit: To answer the question, contribute to rescue, support Governments who fund programs to work with offenders and compliance programs

Photo of lab in working condition for law enforcement at this link: http://www.customs.gov.au/site/page4241.asp You can click through to other pix. It's crazy expensive but I really like Mary Roslin Williams "Advanced Labrador Breeding" and the section in it where she talks about the different styles for different work. Too lean wouldn't work for some work, particularly in cold water, but fat is fat.