Steve

Any more takers?

hey i figured it. they have to do something to make up for all the $$$$$$$$$$'s lost since its been made public u DONT have to vaccinate every single iddy biddy year. think of the hundreds of thousands lost yearly now there? You do in Victoria and NSW - no choice mandatory code.

Steve I decided I might be better for the working group on purebred dog exposure or science research Sorry to be a trouble! No worries.

Good question - probably for now go after dogs and cats because its what we know most about and maybe later look at the others? Im happy to go with either depending on what the group thinks.

So do you think there is a need to try to do a survey or similar to tell us - who does , who doesn't , why they wont , why they cant, why they stop etc ? Also do all trainers have the same target market or are they different for each. Is it economically viable to target one sector of the community over another?

Yes I agree - another reason for us to work together more.

Id also like to add I have no other vested interest in any research or outcome other than trying to determine what is truly best for the dogs we breed and own. I would like to think that any researcher would feel the same. I don't see why ego should come into the mix. I also think if we were to communicate a bit more that sometimes flaws in methodology and objectivity could be spotted sooner rather than later. I do think that the LIDA program is a fantastic idea but as most of you know because Im a purebred breeder I think it has a huge fault which renders it virtually useless for the very people and dogs it supposedly aims to help. I think if we had better communication between the researchers and the stake holders that this could have been dealt with in the beginning rather than hopefully later and funds wouldn't be an issue.

Geez I didnt want to make anyone think I was under valuing what they do and I hope no one thought I was thinking of anyone or anything in particular but in all honesty now Ive seen your figures there are definitely some which just dont seem to justify the time and work - and money thats needed to get to the other end. The study results may be interesting but not really stuff thats going to make any difference for us ordinary dog owners or breeders. I guess also it would depend on what in particular you were studying but Ive got things Id love to see looked at by credible researchers relating to health, husbandry, immunity, environmental impacts etc. Quite often when we do spot results we sort of go - so what? or Why did we need a study for that - it was common knowledge etc. Maybe if when the studies are being undertaken if we had a Dah dah this is what Im doing and why and this is how you will be able to use the results would help too. I think this has been very much neglected in the canine area and obviously its much to do with money but no one really seems to be able to bring the two of us together so the chances of spotting a study which has any real significance for what we are trying to achieve is rare. Anyway Im not trying to make you guys feel un appreciated but I think it would be good if we could generate some funds and get some stuff going we could really use. Id just like to see us talking more I guess. Thats a good place to start. There are just so many things I can think of which could make a real difference to how we do things and the real welfare of the dogs that we desperately need looked at.

Bloody hell are you kidding ? 12 Maremmas $360 for dew claws I have been doing myself for over 30 years!

We can get them the participants if its a worthwhile study. But there seems to be a lot of time and a lot of energy and resources being spent on 'mickey mouse " studies that aren't going to make any difference to anyone or any dog. It just seem to me that with so many issues begging for real studies and research which would make a difference its about time we worked together.

Gayl O Grady has been nominated for Best Dog Trainer of the Year - Sorry Gayle I thought Id already written you up but must have missed you. A most deserving nomination and the more I hear about what dog trainers do as well as help train dogs the more I am in awe of them. Julie

Emma Falzon from no kill dog rescue has been nominated for Foster Carer of the Year. Emma was very excited about her nomination and it is obviously truly deserved. Well done Emma Julie

You had better give me a ring then.0269276707

Majority rule only works if you're also considering individual rights. Because you can't have five wolves and one sheep voting on what to have for supper. Larry Flynt

Take a look at the links on the publicity page of Vic dogs. Links RSPCA Close Puppy Factories Where do puppies come from? Oscar's Law Death Row Pets

Ive been watching pretty closely what kind of studies are being conducted by PHD students in Australia and I have to ask if perhaps they are a bit out of touch and whther we need to work with them more so they can conduct studies we are more interested in and which will have the potential to make a real difference. Whats the go - do we need to pay for them , do we need to approach them - what?

Have you got any interest from the Land on doing a story on the the RSPCA petition ? Not that Im aware of

Nicole Whyte of prefix bravadobe has been nominated for Breeder of the Year Nicole's nomination spoke of her dedication to ensuring that every single person who purchases one of her puppies is happy and successful with their dog Well done Nicole This category sponsored by

then read this http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/Prod/parl...on%20No%202.pdf then download the petition and get it going http://www.mdba.net.au/index.php?option=co...n&Itemid=58

I think given some support and education that labor nationals would only be too glad to not support more power to the RSPCA. But you can't expect them to sand up and say no, when no one is saying that is what they want (and they are not reading DOL LOL). Whre is the ANKC making a stand? Where are the breed clubs and resecue in Victoria making a stand, wehre qre all the pet owners? Has any group gone to the Libs/Nats and said we need help is a very bad bill. Over all Lib/Nationals would be far more likely to understand and do something than Labor now run by the Greens. The rest is then up to us, making ourselves heard, not just in Vic but across the country. vicdogs has said they support the RSPCA in petitioning for more laws. Not a chance any help is coming from them.

I dont want anyone being given more powers to police animal welfare laws until such time as there is at the very least and external accountability process. When inspectors are given police powers they become accountable to the same system as the police because they are special constables. But its not that simple because the entire org isnt accountable to an outside independent authority. If an animal is seized by an RSPCA inspector, taken to an RSPCA facility to be examined by an RSPCA vet who can make a determination and decision without the ability to allow the owner to seek a second opinion and destroy the evidence by cremating the animal before the owner even knows where they have taken the animal there is way too much potential for collusion and corruption - not that Im saying there is. Then add in they get to prosecute you rather than the usual court system which allows them definite advantages ,their own expert witnesses, the ability to with hold evidence ,fear that you will pay huge costs for boarding your animals with them even if you are found not guilty AND WHAT THEY WANT TO DO NOW. You are a sitting duck and told nothing can be done because the courts will decide and if the courts decide against you there is no use complaining because then you are a guilty person with an axe to grind. Be very sure that I am not accusing the RSPCA of anything they shouldn't have done , however there are many many instances where they have been accused of corrupt behaviour. Google anti RSPCA then read this http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/Prod/parl...on%20No%202.pdf

Due to the Fact that Victoria now has laws which prohibit anyone other than a vet taking off dew claws this has made me think about why I started doing them in the first place. The very first puppy I bred went into its new home on Christmas day 1973. I still have contact with this puppy buyer - bloody hell Im old! Anyway back then the idea of cutting off dewclaws never occurred to me so my first few litters all went out with their dew claws on. Over time my puppy buyers would mention the problems they had with them - sometimes from them getting snagged on carpet or other injuries in the back yard but quite often because back then no one ever considered they needed to cut a dogs nails - let alone snip the nail on the dew claw to stop them growing round and into the leg. So originally I decided I probably needed to do them when they were little to avoid them suffering the pain of an injury. I was shown how to do it and all was well. I soon learned that the younger they were the better so I usually simply nipped them out as I was waiting for the next pup to be born when they were less than an hour old while the endorphins were still around which protects them from pain etc as they are being born. Then I met my second husband who bred boxers and he had a whole other process and the dew claws were taken off at around 3 days and they cried and bled where mine didn't do either if they were done earlier. So I said it was cruel and couldn't handle it and the compromise was that we took the next litter to the vet . That was worse - they yelled more and had stitches so he watched what I was doing with the beagles and gave in and from then we always did dew claws when they were only a few minutes old. No pain , no bleeding no scars. No big deal. Over the years my puppy buyers have changed. In the beginning people most likely to want my beagles were families with youngish kids .They chose the breed because it was easy and Id be surprised if one of them ever cut a toenail or looked at the dog's teeth etc - though back then teeth wasn't such a biggy as dogs ate bones and didnt have teeth like they do now. These days the people most likely to want my puppies are child less couples who wouldn't understand how anyone could not clip toenails - and ensure the dew claw was O.K. every day. Now they dont hang out in back yards on their own and most times they sleep inside as part of the family. These days I don't do them and advise my puppy buyers to get the vet to take them off if thats what they want when they get the dog desexed [ when its out cold and cant feel it] There is probably a valid case for continuing to take them off Maremmas as I doubt very much that most farmers go into the paddock and check the dogs toenails and dewclaws and there is a higher risk of injury because of what they do. If I got a few of my puppy buyers telling me of injuries or if mine were suffering because they had them on I would take them off again - but I wouldn't want to do them and then find out in a years time Ive broken the law. There has to a more appropriate way of informing breeders of what is coming so they can be involved in the discussions - and there has to be a better way of informing them of law changes.

Is there?

I like this idea too. I think part of the answer lies in working out why people want dogs in their lives in the first place and appealing to that side of whats in it for me. Some people do want a dog because its gives them opportunity to incorporate that into a social situation - just look at dogs online - the only thing you can pretty much guarantee is that we all have ownership of dogs in common .By coming her we each get different things from the experience basically because we all come and most definitely stay for different reasons. Professional trainers - who do you see as your target market? No amount of discounts on my rego would make me think it was worth it unless you could show me how else I would gain benefit.

How much?