Greytmate

Yes.

I do not discriminate against children or pets, but the main reason that landlords do is that they perceive that they will cause extra damage. By paying extra rent it reduces the financial disincentive to discriminate. While it is illegal to discriminate against families with children, there is nothing at the moment to deter landlords from doing so quietly. Pets not being allowed in rental properties is a major reason stated for why people surrender pets. This is upsetting, because most of these pets can assumed to be wanted or even loved.

What has the original post got to do with children? You have obviously never been a struggling single parent. What do you think all children chew up the door frames and dig up the garden? Yes let's making housing less affordable for families :rolleyes: Animal owners are discriminated against by many landlords. I used children as an example of something it is illegal for landlords to discriminate against, because I believe this type of discrimination against pet owners is a major contributing factor in the over-population of cats and dogs. The more people in a house or animals in a house, the more wear and tear. I am not talking about the extra damage that untrained dogs and feral children might do. Never been a struggling single parent, but have been a landlord who does not discriminate about children or pets. We have had to repair more property damage done by children than pets.

The standard was written before we had the scientific knowledge of genetics we have today. Basically the dark colour on a staff is there because of the brindle gene not the black gene we see in some other breeds. If your dog is a pure staffordshire it is brindle, even though the brindling may be so extensive that you can barely see the lighter colour. It isn't the only thing in the Staffordshire Bull Terrier Standard that has found to be incorrect through genetic knowledge. The standards were written long ago. Genetic knowledge is increasing every day. Your dog is black brindle.

No, I wouldn't do it. Both dogs are of an age where they have not reached social maturity and there could be a battle over something further down the track. It isn't something you are going to be able to predict very well at this age, the dogs may get along very well for a long time before an incident occurs that is worth mounting a challenge over. You could be lucky or unlucky. By waiting for a female, your friend has a better chance of the dogs living harmoniously.

You are the one that has said that people not reclaiming dogs from pounds is an issue. Is it or isn't it? If most people do get their dogs out of pounds and pay the fee then the fee is clearly not too expensive. Why are you arguing for subsidisation for irresponsible people that do refuse to pay? As Aussie said, even $22 would be too much for some people. You are not going to be able to collect reliable statistics on why somebody doesn't bother to reclaim a dog. But the problem is that all these dogs that are left in the pound after 7 days are unclaimed, they came from somebody didn't they? Somebody that has chosen not to reclaim them. I see it coming back to a problem where people do not value their dogs. By lowering reclaiming costs you do nothing to increased the perceived value of the dog, and instead it devalues the dog as well as the important work that councils do in collecting and holding strays and keeping them safe.

You are teaching your dog to hassle you when you are cooking. Which might be fine until one day you have a very hot pan in your hands and you will be unable to stop your dogs pawing you and there could be a terrible accident. It is also dangerous behaviour should you or your husband ever take medication around the dogs. Your dogs do not need you to obey them to be happy, it's just an instinct they are following and it results in habits that most people find undesirable. While it obviously makes you happy and you love the attention, please don't think that you are treating your dog any better or more kindly than those that don't allow the behaviour.

If people don't want to pay a couple of hundred dollars to retrieve their pet, they are probably not going to spend money on much veterinary care either. If there is no fine for a roaming dog, what incentive is there for people to keep their dogs behind good fences? I would rather see an undervalued dog euthanised painlessly in a pound than see it living miserable and painful existence with people that don't believe in spending any money on food, vet care or fencing. People often can afford to retrieve a dog from a pound, but they sometimes choose to spend their money on other things instead. It is all about priority. I am all for the local governments increasing spending, but I don't want to see irresponsible ownership subsidised and encouraged , and I am guessing most ratepayers wouldn't either.

What year was that written in?

The reason so many dogs and cats are euthanised is because people do not value that animal or it has not met their expectations. I find a lot of your questions really loaded. If an animal is euthanised in a pound it is because a shelter wasn't available. Pounds are a government responsibility. Many shelters are a welfare initiative and are not given enough resources to stop the problem. Aggressive dogs are that way usually because they have a genetic propensity for aggression. How people raise the dog sometimes makes no difference. There are plenty of well-raised aggressive dogs around and badly raised dogs with no aggression. Many people choose to own a breed with an aggressive reputation, and want to raise it that way. Education won't stop that, but better enforced dog control laws might. Rarely do people have to give up their dog when life circumstances change. Many choose to prioritise other things over their dog, or buy a dog when they have no control over the circumstances the dog will have to endure. That is irresponsibility and the reason you have listed is a convenient excuse more often than the reason why an animal has to be destroyed. I do not agree with trap neuter release, as cats do a lot of damage to the environment in Australia. Building bigger shelters won't work unless there are the resources to move the dogs through shelters and into new homes. I think that there should be more incentive for people to desex their pets, and more restrictions put on people that breed unregistered animals. I think that tenants should have to pay a much higher bond if they have animals or children, and pay a little extra in rent, but it should be illegal to discriminate against those that want to own pets. Landlords should find an alternate investment that isn't so personal to them if they have a problem with this. I'm not sure why you are asking people not to think too hard about this and just give an opinion. There have been studies done on the reasons why people surrender pets. More pets would be adopted from shelters if people understood that a shelter can be a great place to get a great dog from. Using a poll like this to suggest that shelters might be a reason for the problem isn't very helpful at all.

It will go more smoothly for the pups if they don't have to live with this woman at all. How selfish to buy two large dogs and have to leave them to 'play with each other' while she looks after her own babies. I wouldn't tell her she isn't capable of looking after two babies and two puppies, but I would start calling her Octomum -lite. Who is she trying to impress?

If you are referring to me, then I actually spoke to the sire's owner as I said is a well respected breeder. I did see the dog's pedigree and because we could save a couple of hundred dollars, and to me it didn't make a difference because I wasn't going down the showing or breeding track, I chose to go the cheapskate route. I would not think that the sire's owner would put herself into a situation where she was found to be untruthful. She is to this day winning in the show ring. I can't comment on individual cases, and we would hope that all breeders are honest. When a breeder signs paperwork and registers a pup on the main or limited register they are creating a document that provides evidence that a breeding occurred and that the pup is of that breeding. That is why we have papers and registration, so that breeding claims can be documented should they later need to be verified. Without papers you are in no position to question the truthfulness of the breeder.

The papers are the pedigree. If you do not know what is on a dog's pedigree, have never seen it or don't have access to it, you shouldn't be claiming that your dog is pedigree. Purebred maybe, but if you choose to buy an unpapered dog, there can be no claims made as to a dog's breeding.

Kirislin's link mentioned that the eyelashes had grown into the eye. Poor dear dog. I wondered whether it was double merle breeding as well. I am not surprised that there would be serious eye problems with a dog with that extent of white. Not much pigment in that dog at all. Very sad.

The only canine physiotherapy degree that I know of (UQ) is only open to people that have already qualified in human physio. But there are unqualified people out there performing these services too. I agree with those that suggested the OP look at using her existing degree in a company that manufactures for animals. Vet repping is very hard to get into, but having a degree along with a passion for dogs puts you in that lucrative job market. Why not do some voluntary work in the mean time, with a reputable animal welfare organisation or community based obedience club? This sort of voluntary experience is generally viewed favourably. I think it is important that everyone should try to be self-supporting, because earning a low wage will reduce the opportunities you have in life and won't allow you to get ahead. Survival is possible on a low wage, but it means less freedom of choice.

Puppy will go through a series of quite a few sleep and play cycles over 24 hours. (depending on age) You will get a play session tonight. The thing to do is let them sleep totally undisturbed when they want to, and be ready to take them straight outside for a play and toilet after they wake and after each meal. Have fun.

Check your fencing, that is most important. Little dogs can push through wires and be away from you very quickly. Aside from that, keep watch at all times and remove anything from the puppies mouth that shouldn't be there. Many plants are toxic (grass is fine) but you don't have time to pull out any plants, just enjoy the puppy.

Are you offering a reward? If she is being held by somebody, a reward may motivate somebody to call if they know about it.

I agree in some ways but many working dog breeders keep a detailed record of their lines, dogs only go to friends, proven wokrability, health etc.. just because they do not belong to the AKNC doesn't mean they're no good at breeding, same as belonging to the AKNC doesn't guarantee that someone is good. Most BYBers though don't have a clue and you' re correct you just don't know what you're going to get. I did not say ANKC registered, I said registered. There are other registries beside ANKC. You either register what you breed, or you are just another idiot throwing two dogs together.

I don't think so. Registered breeders breed openly and transparently. Their choices are recorded for anyone to see, whether they turned out to be good choices or poor. Breeders of unregistered dogs who do not record pedigree are just hiding their activities, nobody knows what lines are in their dogs and those dogs are useless for future breeding programs. They are not the same kind of breeders as registered breeders at all, and it doesn't matter what their philosophy is if the dogs they produce have unknown and unregistered parentage, their lines have no future.

Big subject Corvus. Reading a dog's non-verbal communication and knowing how best to respond to it or alter it are two different fields. I don't think a class situation is ideal for setting up some of the communicative behaviours, and forcing a dog to display some of them would be considered unethical. But a basic video or online visualisation that is simple and engaging for the average pet owner to watch could be used to show the behaviours in fine detail and explain what they all might indicate. It would be a great resource, something that could be recommended in a lot of the threads here to people who may be unsure about their dog's emotional state. Might not be as good a business as classes are, but I wouldn't recommend people pay for training advice from anyone that didn't have a lot of years of experience in working with dogs.

Of course she wasn't quite right. The people that sold her to you let you down in a big way by refusing to acknowledge that. There is a fair chance the reason she ended up being put up for rehoming in the first place was because she wasn't quite right. You did all you possibly could, I don't think you should feel any guilt. It was just very sad, that is all.

That depends on whether the transport price was given at the time of sale - At the time the deposit was made. If it was clearly stated at the time of sale that transport was a separate charge to a separate company, then the transport price changing should not void the deposit at all. I'm with those that think the breeder should not refund or should only refund a small portion. The breeder has already put work into the arrangements for this dog, and has removed it from sale potentially turning away other buyers, and the deposit will compensate for the wasted time and effort. People that reneg on deals for dubious reasons are time wasters, deposits are the only protection a seller has to avoid being disadvantaged by unscrupulous people.

In that case you would be very clearly entitled to a refund, if there is no dog there can be no sale. The benefit of paying a deposit is that the breeder knows whether a pup is sold or not sold. This benefits both parties. If the buyer does change their mind, the deposit gives them an incentive to notify the breeder as soon as possible which is in the best interests of the dog concerned.

Sounds like a separation of off-leash area and wildlife habitat. Which sounds like a good idea to me.