Steve

true, but what is the gain for females if you trade uterine cancer for an increase of HSA from 1.6% to 7.6% and up to 5.7% for MCT, which is nearly non-existent in intact females?...and for males the negative trade offs seem to be avoidable only if they are de-sexed when older, which raises the question: if you can manage your entire male for the first 2 years, why wouldn't you be able to manage it for the years to come? Arguing what is the gain isnt going to take us anywhere because at the end of the day its about being educated on all of the issues and having the freedom to choose to do what you and your vet consider to be the best for you and your dog. I understand that its difficult to educate everyone who will be asked to face the question but its the entire system which actively suppresses the provable facts and doesn't enable the dog owner to make the best decisions for them. Some will consider the risks and still see that its worth the risk for them to live more happily with their dog - others wont. You have to be careful how you present your defence of your decision which isnt doing what you are complaining of to others. Making them defend their choices rather than trying to educate them on why you made your choice.

Well clearly those who make the rules believe that providing a lesser fee to reward the behaviour they want is the way to go .The importance of their priorities is on desexing and this is the only measure of whether someone is deemed to be potentially more responsible. Those who are motivated to do so and get the lesser fees also have to pay higher fees due to vet costs . Any number of strategies and incentives, penalties can be put in place depending on what the focus is going to be on and what the goal is. For now the goal is get everyone to desex their dogs but if it were get everyone to take their puppies to puppy preschool similar processes would produce the same results.

I'm not so sure about incentives - registrations should be easier and enforced. Imagine our cars wouldn't be registered. I'm still contemplating about the numbers. Currently breeders are providing approx. 420,000 puppies (10 years average life span assumed), approx. 70,000 are from recognized and registered breeders, and considering their T&Cs I don't believe that these puppies will have a major impact on pounds. That leaves approx. 350,000 new puppies from not registered breeders that are sold / bought in a less controlled environment. The breeders aiming for profit among this group don't have a big interest to de-sex, being controlled and registered - and I can't see that the current system address their loop holes. Approx. 50,000 dogs end up in pounds - what it tells me is that even a very small group of irresponsible breeders among the ones that cater for the 350,000 puppies can have a devastating impact if they 'throw too many puppies' on the market. If this relative small group can't be tracked down and controlled, I believe the only other option is education and some kind of 'dog license' for owners (similar to a driver license or gun license)...the aim would be to increase their commitment, make them think twice before embarking on a dog ownership ...and here I believe incentives for educational accompanying measures would be well spent. You want to be a dog owner?...pass a theoretical test, spend 8 hours of voluntary work in a pound, demonstrate some practical skills in a dog trainings club...and you are ready to get you P-plate dog owner license ...verify that you do obedience training with your dog for at least 1 year and you get your full dog owner license... I agree with education but will fight you on licenses . The demand for puppies far out weighs the demand so how can you say that there are too many coming onto the market place . People - pet owners want new puppies.

Might be pertinent to note that Dr Silliance is the head honcho for a pet shop group. What she says is true if you don't have testicles you don't get testicular cancer, if you don't have a uterus you don't get uterine cancer or pyometra. This is a provable fact But what is the incidence of intact dogs getting these things and how many other cancers in other bits of their bodies are they more likely to get ? the 90% figure probably comes from registration stats - that's also the figure they throw around in the states. I would argue that the rest of that article could be easily challenged under demand to show that what is said in able to be proven. Its part of the brain washing process thats impacted by things other than what is best for dogs.

So what about if instead of incentives to desex your dog these are replaced with other incentives? Incentive if your puppy is microchipped by the breeder before you take it home. This would impress the importance of purchasing from a breeder who microchips prior to sale as per current laws and move toward more animals past 8 weeks being able to be identified and accurate stats collected. Incentives for vaccinating and basic training. When the council sends out the paperwork to the new owner included could be things they need to consider - proven facts and management requirements they will face with an entire dog not biased toward what some think should be the outcome regarding desexing.

Female dogs on heat are often very much different to what they are when not on heat .they dont call em bitches for nothing. A nice quiet easy going girl starts to focus on nothing more than getting a male dog etc. Around here I know about a week before any of my girls come on heat because they start being more assertive with each other over meals and attention. Mine just get very sooky. That too but with each other it can get a bit full on when they are on heat in comparison to when they are not. See it more obviously in the Maremma than the beagles but it still there.

Female dogs on heat are often very much different to what they are when not on heat .they dont call em bitches for nothing. A nice quiet easy going girl starts to focus on nothing more than getting a male dog etc. Around here I know about a week before any of my girls come on heat because they start being more assertive with each other over meals and attention.

The problem is the OP posting history. Do you mean in other threads? I've never noticed any problem but could have missed something Ive only ever seen him challenging common beliefs,and quite enjoyed his input. If there is a problem where he is in breach of forum rules surely thats up to Troy to sort out. I don't believe that because someone has a posting history that others dont appreciate that it should be reason to skitch him in every post either and trying to shut him up.

By the way this topic has been done before - a lot and I and many others have presented provable facts regarding the pros and cons for the welfare of dogs which some people want to call pseudo science. If there are other studies which prove what I believe to be proven facts based on the numerous studies Ive researched Im happy to look at them and take them into account as I form and keep my opinion. Dog owners are entitled to know the proven facts of pros and cons of desexing and how age of desexing may impact on their dog's health before they get bullied into doing it just as they should know the consequences of other things which are seen to be or are aspects of being a responsible pet owner . So some people are sick of it some people have never heard of it some people are at a different place now to where they were when they first saw it . What is the goal of providing lower fees for desexed dogs and will having more dogs desexed attain that goal or make it worse. Its not just about me , my decision and my dogs its about the system that never seems to budge off what is . How do we progress if we stop debate and dont challenge political correctness . If this environment enables people to feel free to give their experiences and opinions and dont feel under attack if these are challenged we may even get somewhere.

That's not clear to me - to me it is clear that he doesn't like being tagged unethical because he doesn't desex ,he is tired of being penalised and having to defend himself because of his choice. He thinks his decision is right and he is defending why he made it and wants to talk about it - where is the problem here?

Too bad some of the posts in this thread are inflammatory and confrontational toward the OP and seem to be designed to punish the OP in some way for wanting to discuss something he sees as worthy of a chat. It also prevents other from saying what they truly think in fear of being belted. For me personally Ive never given much thought to the whole increased fees for entire animals ,never really thought about whether they are punishments or incentives and several other things which have sparked my thought processes because of this thread. I think its a worthy conversation and I would like to see people being able to say what they think so we can challenge our own views and take a look at others. So far its led me to thinking differently about possible solutions for the numbers being dumped which Ive not considered before and Im enjoying it because I think challenging the same old same old so we don't get the same old same old results is healthy and what is best for the dogs Im more than happy to be proven wrong if it means less dogs suffer and change my view and put in place programs which may help so if you dont want to contribute and debate what you feel is one thing or another why muck it up for everyone else?

So in other words advocating desexing as a method of having less dogs presented with behavioural problems is counter productive to the stated goal because according to these studies and about a thousand others desexing causes more behavioural problems than it cures. If we are to address the questions regarding behavioural problems we need to look at other potential solutions. Including advocating NOT desexing.

This will depend on geography and management. RSPCA have different policies on rehoming and assessment that differ considerably to smaller and private rescues. I dont think the question is "are pounds really too full" especially as you take into account that pounds are not the only players for receipt of unwanted animals with some having no kill policies etc How many dogs being dumped, surrendered PTS etc as an expected and acceptable figure for our society is also very subjective. Some will say even just one is too many others will accept that in most things in this world shit happens and its unavoidable for a percentage of dogs which find homes as puppies will end up being unwanted or simply no longer able to be kept by the people who took responsibility for them. Its probably more productive to strip the stats we have down to things like Why do dogs which have behavioural issues stated as the reason for them being surrendered have behavioural issues. Is it something they are born with, is it something due to lack of training , is it simply a lack of suitability to the lifestyle of the owner. Can we take action with breeders to ensure they breed well temperamented animals, can we ensure we reach more new owners with basic principals of training and good manners or can we educate people on selecting animals with characteristics which will suit them and their families. The answer is probably all of the above but either way its a different management and strategy with different incentives required to try to impact the numbers being bought in for this reason. How does advocating desexing pet dogs impact on the potential problem of behavioural problems?

We dont know how many dogs that are dumped are desexed. We dont know how many dogs that are dumped are sick and their owner's chose this as a method of having them PTS We dont know how many dogs that are in pounds are not chipped We dont know how many dogs that are dumped come from pet shops, registered breeders, other rescues, BYB or puppy farmers, oops litters. We dont know how many dogs that are dumped are as a result of a life changing event for the owner We dont know how many dogs that are dumped come from pregnant bitches or puppies under 8 weeks. We dont know how many dogs that are dumped are due to aggressive temperaments We dont know how many dogs that are tagged as dangerous are desexed We dont know how many dogs that are found wandering are desexed and that's just a start to knowing what the problem of dogs being dumped is about before we start handing out incentives and or penalties and beating a drum for what we think is the answers for one thing or another

Identify the problem - some dogs are not microchipped. Why ? How do we fix it or at least reduce the problem? If puppy buyers are educated not to buy a puppy that isn't microchipped then unless the pup is microchipped the breeder is going to have a harder time selling them. If puppy buyers in NSW dont know by now that before a puppy leaves the breeder or the pet shop that they have to be chipped its way way passed time where we looked at why they dont know and fix it so they do. How do we set up an incentive program for puppy buyers who ensure their puppies are microchipped before they take them home. The breeder already has several incentive not to -save money stay hidden etc. There are already penalties in place if they get caught allowing the pups to leave their property without a chip so unless we are going to see major turnaround and see the laws being enforced the problem of dogs not being microchipped remains constant. So all of the great advice [sic] handed out to people who buy puppies , what to look for , what to ask the breeder blah blah blah , there is no emphasis on the breeder having to microchip and what to do if they find a breeder who doesn't. If a breeder in NSW doesn't chip puppies before they go home perhaps part of the solution is looking at educating the buyer , empowering the buyer to make a quick complaint and providing them with an incentive for purchasing a pup that was chipped before they got it would see more dogs being microchipped according to state law prior to sale.

But hang on a minute even though you say we need better research and figures to show us possible solutions you have also decided that you know what solutions will be required . No amount of cheaper easier, new systems will work any better than any we already have if the unbiased data is not collected and options discussed and considered that are innovative. We need to define the problems, then identify the possible solutions not juts carry on as always with each person shouting about what they believe is the solution.

Can we play the ball and not the man - we get more value out of a discussion if the topic is debated without personally attacking someone who has a left field opinion. If you all think he is wrong debate the issue and try and turn him around,prove him wrong if you are sure he is and give him a chance to defend his position and try and turn you around and see who reading this can be educated on both view points. At this rate all thats going to happen is the thread will be shut down.

There are so many variables that its impossible right now to be able to pin the tag of worst offender for dogs turning up in pounds on any group. Farmers [working dog breeders] who don't have to register their dogs and sell puppies un vaccinated and not chipped are in high numbers around rural communities .Working Dog Rescue is never short of dogs to help and you see everywhere you look on supermarket notice boards and facebook local selling sites advertising puppies for $50 each around here. they don't have a problem getting rid of the pups but people who take working dog puppies free or for a couple of bucks without knowing what their characteristics are would be high risk of not chipping, not vaccinating and not keeping them if they are too hard to manage. In another shire close by the rangers tell me their biggest problem is the hunting dog breeders and owners. Some BYB will chip others won't .the only dogs you can be sure will have a chip are those which have a registered pedigree because the pedigrees are not issued without them .That doesn't mean to say that registered breeders register all of their puppies or that all registered breeders chip all of their puppies. Edited to add all pet shop puppies are chipped as well in NSW.

Do the incentives reach their goal? When microchipping laws were introduced its was supposed to be about identification - well if you want an incentive for everyone to microchip having no registration fees would seem to make more sense.

It seems to me the puppies aren't the problem. Even in cases where a pregnant girl or a young litter comes into rescue they are in high demand by rescue groups to take and their puppies are more easily sold for a higher price. It doesn't take much energy for anyone to sell puppies to new owners who present as people who will look after their dog and be responsible for it. Its the owners who have life changing situations, who cant stand the dog because it doesn't match their expectations, or basically people who see them as they see everything else - easily replaceable. Until the real stats are available we all just guess as to where they come from and who could be held more responsible. No matter how hard a breeder or a rescue tries to screen em, educate them, or support them the final onus for responsibility of looking after a dog is on the owner . Like Willem I don't believe there should be a system that rewards people for desexing their dogs over other responsible behaviours . How many desexed dogs are dumped? All of the studies including the one via the ACT where desexing is mandatory show that it doesn't change one little dot the numbers dumped - it does change the numbers of desexed dogs dumped. A government should not take the place of educated decisions made between an owner and their vet and all responsible behaviours should be rewarded . I am aware that the registration fee applies for life even if an animal changes hands but seriously Steve, this statement does not pass the sniff test. We are not required to register our dogs until they are 6 months of age. Are you telling me you register them at 8 weeks before they go to their new homes as breeding dogs? And, what you are doing is circumventing the very system you support. Not all of these animals would be kept by their new owners for breeding purposes. How could you possibly know that? So in essence you say you support it but you don't. No puppies are not the issue. No one will dump a puppy now will they? Wait till they get older and the human decides it too hard or not pretty enough or doesn't fit well with the kid…..umpteen different reasons that humans find to justify a dog being disposable. An example is my Jess girl, owners bought her advertised as a rotti, no papers and wasn't even close to a rotti. Once they realized that (12 months) they say they are taking her to the pound. Charging higher registration rates for undesexed dogs is not going to change the situation. The responsible owners pay the higher prices and the irresponsible ones find ways around that system. I personally have other issues with desexing a male dog also. Just because we are not required to register our dogs until they are 6 months of age doesn't mean we are not able to register them at 1 day of age. They are breeding dogs and all have Dogs NSW papers and MDBA papers they are mine when I register them and I have 14 days to transfer the new owner details. They usually go home between 9 and 12 weeks but often don't go until they are much older after they have done their preliminary training. I'm not circumventing the system - the dogs are microchipped, registered in the new owner's name and the rego is paid which I recoup from the new owner. the council gets their money. Not sure where Ive ever been seen to be supporting a system which charges a higher fee to people who choose not to desex their dogs unless they have paid membership and prefix charges to an approved body . Edited to ad in NSW you have to register your dog by 6 months of age .Dogs NSW require someone to be a member for 18 months before they get a prefix so if we assume that someone owns a breeding dog and intends to go through this with DOgs NSW and follow the NSW law they would be charged the higher rate. at the dog's 6 month age. When their prefixes are approved there is no refund .

I thought microchipping is mandatory?...obviously not. As a side note: I wonder whether eye scanners (like some mobile phones provide instead of finger print scanners) could be also used to identify dogs. If it would work there would be a database with the code each scan provides for each dog instead of the microchip number. The big advantage would be that you could identify any - registered dog - just via your mobile phone (if the phone has the feature)...might be handy... Microchipping in NSW has been mandatory since the early 90's but still a large percentage of dogs being dumped are not chipped . Just because its the law doesn't mean everyone follows it and after July when new regs come in for microchipping in NSW even less will be chipped.

Once a dog is registered as a potential breeding dog for $52 by a registered breeder even after it changes hands and goes to someone who will not be breeding there is no more cost . I pay the $52 to register all of my puppies which are going to NSW owners with my local council before I send them home. The ones that are going out for working in NSW have free registration too. It seems to me the puppies aren't the problem. Even in cases where a pregnant girl or a young litter comes into rescue they are in high demand by rescue groups to take and their puppies are more easily sold for a higher price. It doesn't take much energy for anyone to sell puppies to new owners who present as people who will look after their dog and be responsible for it. Its the owners who have life changing situations, who cant stand the dog because it doesn't match their expectations, or basically people who see them as they see everything else - easily replaceable. Until the real stats are available we all just guess as to where they come from and who could be held more responsible. No matter how hard a breeder or a rescue tries to screen em, educate them, or support them the final onus for responsibility of looking after a dog is on the owner . Like Willem I don't believe there should be a system that rewards people for desexing their dogs over other responsible behaviours . How many desexed dogs are dumped? All of the studies including the one via the ACT where desexing is mandatory show that it doesn't change one little dot the numbers dumped - it does change the numbers of desexed dogs dumped. A government should not take the place of educated decisions made between an owner and their vet and all responsible behaviours should be rewarded .

Not all brachy head breeds have the same problems as the BB Have a look at the section of the breed standard for the French Bulldog and you can see why the puppies you found look good in comparison to a breed that has a standard that is like the one above. french Bulldog My link Head square in appearance and in proportion to dog’s size. Skull nearly flat between ears, domed forehead. The skin covering the skull and forehead should be supple enough to allow fine wrinkling when the dog is alert. Well defined muzzle, broad, deep and set back, muscles of cheeks well developed. Stop well defined. Lower jaw deep, square, broad, slightly undershot and turned up. Nose black and wide, relatively short, with open nostrils and line between well defined. Lips black, thick, meeting each other in centre, completely hiding teeth. Upper lip covers lower on each side with plenty of cushion, never so exaggerated as to hang too much below level of lower jaw.

deleted.

There is much that I am not able to say on this forum but Im convinced that there is a way to get around the issues which are obstacles to change and for us to be able to show that we get it and we are able to show improvement for the welfare of the dogs.And quickly. For a variety of reason I believe the ANKC is way behind the rest of the world and that this will see their members pay the price for that in the not too distant future I'm more than happy with the strategies and registration requirements for each breed which we have developed which focus on what is best for the dogs and Im convinced there are enough purebred registered breeders who are not totally consumed with show rewards over and above all else that will take up the challenge. If the culture continues on as it has always been since the current system began any thought that "its not us" will wash and not see laws made to restrict what is bred and how is simply crazy.